General Electric v. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries

DisputeSoft was engaged as a consulting expert by the defendant in the matter of General Electric Co. v. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., et al.  DisputeSoft utilized an electronic discovery application capable of searching terabytes of potentially relevant data stored on backup tapes, saving Mitsubishi millions of dollars in potential discovery costs.

Mitsubishi requested production of email messages stored on GE backup tapes in defending against GE’s claim that Mitsubishi had infringed two of its wind-turbine-technology patents.  Factoring in both the sheer amount of raw data stored on the archival tapes that would first need to be restored, as well as the need for extensive attorney review of any relevant documents, General Electric estimated that it would cost as much as $23.4 million to conduct a comprehensive review of the electronically stored information.  Furthermore, General Electric argued that the data on the backup tapes was inaccessible, and that Mitsubishi should therefore bear the financial burden under cost-shifting principles articulated by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in Zubulake v. UBS Warburg.

DisputeSoft e-discovery expert Jeff Parmet filed a declaration proposing that the backup tapes could be reviewed using DisputeSoft’s proprietary e-discovery application – e-Sift℠ – at a substantially lower cost.  The e-Sift℠ application identified and extracted thousands of documents for further review and reduced Mitsubishi’s potential e-discovery costs by two orders of magnitude.

Some of DisputeSoft’s electronic discovery experts who worked on this case were Brendan McParland, Josh Siegel, and Nick Ferrara.

For a description of the services we provide as electronic discovery experts, please click here.