Response to Motion to Compel Response in Native Format With Metadata

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR A SAMPLE DISTRICT

________________________________

) Case [Form] No.: 7.1(f)

Peter Plaintiff, )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

Donald Defendant, )

Defendant )

________________________________ )

Moving Party: _____________

Respondent: _____________

RESPONSE TO MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONDING PARTY

TO PRODUCE ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS

IN A NATIVE FORMAT WITH METADATA INCLUDED

The Responding Party, ______________, by and through his attorneys, hereby requests that this honorable court deny the Moving Party's Motion to Compel the Production of Documents in a Native Format for the following reasons:

1. The Moving Party did as alleged in his motion submit a Notice For Production of Documents to the Defendant on _______, 20 __.

2. The Respondent does not necessarily agree that all of the requested documents are relevant or discoverable; and in any event, even if they were, there is no justifiable basis for requiring that they all be in a native format.

3. The Moving Party claims that whenever a document is relevant or discoverable, it must logically follow that the identity of the information contained in the document's metadata would also be relevant or, at least, reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. But this statement is not true. In fact, most metadata is irrelevant.

4. Respondent offered to provide the requested documents to the Moving Party in a PDF or ____...