Discovery, though often complex in execution, is conceptually straightforward. Parties request from their adversaries materials that are within the permissible scope of discovery; responding parties may then object or proceed with efforts to collect, review and produce the materials. If the requesting parties are dissatisfied with the production, they can work directly with the responding party to address their concerns, or bring motions to the court.

A recent matter in the Northern District of Illinois, however, found this process turned on its head. Instead of submitting a request for production of certain materials, the requesting party asked to directly access the responding parties’ systems through forensic examination. The court ultimately denied this request, finding it was not proportional to the needs of the case.

‘Tireboots v. Tiresocks’