Free Answering Brief in Opposition - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv—O1266-SLR Document 235-2 Filed O3/21/2006 Page 1 of 3
Exhibit A
Defendants’ Correction of Plaintiffs’ Exhibits C and E
Regarding Over-Designation

Case 1:04-cv—01266-SLR Document 235-2 Filed 03/21/2006 Page 2 of 3
Defendants’ Correction of Plaintiffs’ Exhibits C and E
Regarding Over-Designation
Number of Pages of
Documents Alleged
by Plaintiffs to Have
Been Produced from
Lo · s Defendants’ Correction
Feb. 18, 2005 2,824 • 22,825 pages produced
i ' 2; • Only 121 pages containing redactions were logged and
SG ' 2 0005 4001 withheld as privileged
Se . 9, 2005 717 • More than 22,000 pages were produced on rolling basis
Sep. 20, 2005 8,234 promptly after responsiveness review or after Court
resolved dispute over responsive dates on Apr. 26, 2005
• Those 22,000+ pages were never designated as
privileged on any log
Nov. 1, 2005 34 • Only 97 pages
Nov. 4, 2005 28
N0V_ 23l 2005 35 • Documents de-designated because Special Master
issued case-specific standards for work product
designation (Oct. 31, 2005 Tr. 109-13)
Dec. 16, 2005 2,829 • 22,425 pages produced
Dec. 22, 2005 18,707 . . .
DEC 23 2005 880 • Documents de-designated in response to Special
` ’ Master’s Dec. 1, 2005 decision
• Documents are double counted in part because they
include re-production of previously redacted documents
(i.e., where redactions appeared on part of a page),
because of software constraints
Jan. 8, 2006 1,902 • 3,461 pages (3,530 pages in plaintiffs’ total is in error)
Jan. 11, 2006 1,129 . . .
Jan 10 2000 400 • Documents were privileged on their face
• Defendants subsequently learned that documents had
been disclosed to third parties, especially outside
auditors, and produced them
• Documents are double counted in part because many
documents are electronic copies of BCE’s public
securities filings that consist of a cover e-mail which was
produced in December 2005 with entirely redacted
attachments; once BCE realized that those documents
were not privileged, the same number of pages was
Bates stamped a second time
Feb. 21, 2006 7,123 • 7,123 pages produced
• Documents are double counted in part because they
include re-production of previously redacted documents
(i.e., where redactions appeared on part of a page),
because of software constraints
TOTAL 56,000 ln addition to comments above, pIaintiffs’ page count is also
inflated because:
A-1

Case 1:04-cv—01266-SLR Document 235-2 Filed 03/21/2006 Page 3 of 3
• Special Master required BCE to produce cover e-mails
whose attachments were privileged
o Since December 2005, BCE produced nearly 7,200
pages that are redacted in full (that is, privileged
attachments to non-privileged cover e-mails)
o Thus, nearly 13% ofthe pages plaintiffs include in
their 55,000 total page count are blank
• Many of the documents on the logs are identical copies,
which were each logged for the sake of consistency
A-2