USA


Home  |  Blog  |  Contact
Mimosa Blog

Archive for February, 2010

To Mimosa Systems and Symantec Enterprise Vault Customers

Thursday, February 25th, 2010

Contrary to rumors that have been appearing in the last couple of days, Mimosa Systems/Iron Mountain will not be sun-setting any features, capabilities or products. In reality we will be increasing investment in NearPoint solution development and applications, and are adding features and functionality.

For many years now Mimosa Systems has been known in the market for its innovative next-generation solutions for email, file and SharePoint archiving, which are years ahead of the Symantec Enterprise Vault solution.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

French Email Privacy Restrictions Not Always FRCP Obstruction

Tuesday, February 23rd, 2010

The two blog entries below point out some slightly different views of an interesting case about employee email privacy decided in France on Dec 15, 2009. The case was: Bruno B. vs. Giraud et Migot, Cour de Cassation, Chambre Sociale, Paris, 15 Dec. 2009, No. 07-44264

http://chrisdale.wordpress.com/2010/02/22/the-extent-of-te-right-to-privacy-in-french-employee%E2%80%99s-e-mails/

http://www.hhdataprotection.com/2010/02/articles/litigation/new-french-case-removes-automatic-privacy-shield-from-employee-emails-making-them-more-amenable-to-us-discovery/


---------------------------------------------------------------------

Iron Mountain acquires Mimosa Systems

Monday, February 22nd, 2010

http://www.mimosasystems.com/html/news-pr-mimosa-systems-acquired-by-iron-mountain-02-22-10.htm

Iron Mountain Adds All-in-One, On-Premises Archive to Complement its Cloud Offerings; Company Now Capable of Managing Information Wherever it Resides

BOSTON (Feb. 22, 2010) – Iron Mountain Incorporated (NYSE: IRM), an information management services company, today announced it has acquired Santa Clara, Calif.-based Mimosa Systems, Inc., a leader in enterprise-class content archiving solutions, for approximately $112 million in cash, subject to closing adjustments. The deal provides Iron Mountain with an integrated archive for email, SharePoint data and files, and gives the company an on-premises archiving option to complement its existing cloud-based archives.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

Litigation Hold, Adverse Inference and Additional eDiscovery Costs

Friday, February 19th, 2010

In Melendres v. Arpaio, CV-07-2513-PHX (D. Ariz. February 11, 2010) (UNPUBLISHED),  U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow granted plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions and ruled that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (“MCSO”) failed to issue a timely litigation hold resulting in the destruction of relevant documents, including e-mails.

In discovery, plaintiffs learned the MCSO shredded relevant documents (i.e., stat sheets) and deleted e-mails.  In addition, not a single deponent was aware of their obligation to preserve evidence.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

How Exchange 2010 handles archiving and retention

Wednesday, February 17th, 2010

As expected the archiving functionality in Exchange 2010 created quite a bit of a buzz with people and most have been wondering how in reality the archiving functionality stacks up against traditional archiving products like Mimosa NearPoint.   Microsoft positions Exchange 2010 archiving at the moment as a Personal Archive and suggests customers who have a strict need for compliance to look at business archiving solutions under which they classify Mimosa NearPoint which offers besides email archiving, advanced eDiscovery, File System Archiving and SharePoint Archiving.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes to the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure

Thursday, February 11th, 2010

An excellent description of the new Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure from the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General which took effect on Jan 1, 2010 can be found here.


---------------------------------------------------------------------

Are foreign laws restricting the production of customer data being ignored by US courts?

Wednesday, February 10th, 2010

In a recent case; Accessdata Corp. v. ALSTE Tech. GMBH, 2010 WL 3184777 (D. Utah Jan. 21, 2010), the Plaintiff, an American company, sought to compel defendant’s production of documents, including information related to customer complaints and defendant’s technical support of non-customers.  Defendant objected to the interrogatories and requests for production on the grounds that they were overly broad, unduly burdensome, and seeking irrelevant information and because “disclosure of information relating to third parties’ identities would violate German law.”


---------------------------------------------------------------------

Concept Search and Early Case Assessment

Friday, February 5th, 2010

There has been an ongoing argument as to the validity of concept search verses keyword search in discovery searches. The main arguments I have seen are:

  1. Keyword searches tend to miss relevant documents and are under-inclusive in their search results.
  2. Concept searches tend to produce too many non-responsive documents and are considered over-inclusive in their search results.

---------------------------------------------------------------------