U.S. v. Google LLC

Citation: Civil Action No. I:23cv0108 (E.D. Va. 2024)
Summary: The court determined that a redacted document containing legal advice from the defendant's in-house attorney was protected by the attorney-client privilege and did not need to be produced to the plaintiffs. The document was an electronically stored file and the court's decision emphasized the importance of protecting ESI and conducting in camera review for privilege-related purposes.
Court: United States District Court, E.D. Virginia
Date decided: July 3, 2023
Judge: Anderson, John F.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al. Plaintiffs, v. GOOGLE LLC, Defendant Civil Action No. I:23cv0108 (LMB/JFA) United States District Court, E.D. Virginia Filed July 03, 2023 Anderson, John F., United States Magistrate Judge ORDER Having reviewed defendant's response to the court's order on plaintiffs' motion to compel (Docket no. 275) concerning the last of the documents the court agreed to review in camera for privilege related purposes, the court finds that the redaction made to document GOOG-DOJ-AT-0 11 39590 (the comment made on July 20, 2020 at 15: 17:46) does appear to contain information that constitutes legal advice from defendant's in-house attorney concerning certain contract terms. That information falls within the attorney-client privilege and the court will not order its production to plaintiffs. Entered this 3rd day o f July, 2023.