No Redaction for Confidential or Irrelevant Material

The ALJ granted in part complainants' motion to compel respondents to produce a revised privilege log where documents had been redacted for relevance and confidentiality. "[T]he [ALJ] finds that this practice conflicts with Commission Rule 210.30, which requires that parties produce documents as they are kept in the usual course of business. Redacting material from documents deprives the receiving party from viewing the responsive material in its proper context and creates the question of whether responsive material was removed. Furthermore, the Protective Order is in place to protect the confidential information in responsive, non-privileged documents, and thus Complainants’ argument that it redacted confidential material to protect third parties is unpersuasive."

Dynamic Random Access Memory & NAND Flash Memory Devices & Products Containing Same, 337-TA-803 (ITC June 4, 2012, Order) (Gildea, ALJ).