04.11.2014 Views

Rimkus Consulting Group Inc. v. Cammarata - Ballard Spahr LLP

Rimkus Consulting Group Inc. v. Cammarata - Ballard Spahr LLP

Rimkus Consulting Group Inc. v. Cammarata - Ballard Spahr LLP

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Case 4:07-cv-00405 Document 450 Filed in TXSD on 02/19/10 Page 59 of 139<br />

and “To: Gary Bell,” with no indication of the email addresses. (Id.). When the email was<br />

produced in native format, it showed six attachments not included in the original PDF<br />

version. (Docket Entry No. 411). <strong>Rimkus</strong> filed the attachments under seal. (Id.). The<br />

attachments contain contact information for <strong>Rimkus</strong> clients in Florida and for one client’s<br />

national catastrophe manager in Minnesota. (Docket Entry No. 410 at 7). <strong>Rimkus</strong> asserts<br />

that the metadata shows that Darren Balentine created the documents at <strong>Rimkus</strong> on<br />

December 14, 2007 and April 2, 2008, while he was working for <strong>Rimkus</strong>. Balentine<br />

subsequently quit <strong>Rimkus</strong> to become a 50% owner of U.S. Forensic Associates. (Id. at 8).<br />

The metadata also shows that the documents were converted to PDF on April 2, 2008. (Id.).<br />

On May 1, 2008, less than a month after the April 6, 2008 email with the clientcontact<br />

information attached, Bell had testified in this court that he did not take or use<br />

confidential information when he left <strong>Rimkus</strong> and started U.S. Forensic. (Docket Entry No.<br />

410, Ex. Supp. V at 80:16–:24). On October 6, 2009, Bell testified that he did not remember<br />

getting the April 2008 email until it was produced. He did not know whether he had received<br />

other <strong>Rimkus</strong> client information. (Docket Entry No. 430 at 12). Bell testified that he had<br />

never used the client-contact information in the email attachments. (Id. at 14). Bell also<br />

testified that he did not ask Balentine for the information and did not know why Balentine<br />

sent it to him. (Id. at 16). Bell’s counsel, Demmons, stated that he had prepared and printed<br />

the emails for production and could not explain why the initial production not only failed to<br />

include the attachments but concealed their presence. (Id. at 36).<br />

In his April 9, 2009 deposition, Balentine stated that he had not to his knowledge<br />

59

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!