Williams v. Sprint/United Mgmt Co., 230 F.R.D. 640 (D. Kan. 2005).
In an employment case involving allegations of age discrimination, the plaintiffs requested native production of Microsoft Excel spreadsheets so they would be able to determine if the documents "had any actual other columns or types of information available on a spreadsheet." After receiving the spreadsheets from the defendant, the plaintiffs claimed the defendant "scrubbed" the spreadsheet files to remove metadata without producing a log of the information scrubbed. The plaintiffs also asserted the defendant locked cells and data on the spreadsheets, thus preventing the plaintiffs from accessing those cells. The defendant admitted it had scrubbed metadata and locked certain cells but argued the plaintiffs never requested production of the metadata and claimed the metadata was irrelevant and contained privileged information. The court gave the defendant seven days to show why it should not produce electronic Microsoft Excel spreadsheets in native format and why it should not be sanctioned for its behavior. The defendant declared its actions were made in good faith, designed to prevent the plaintiffs from discovering information the Magistrate ruled undiscoverable, and maintained data integrity. Although the court did not sanction the defendant, it ordered the defendant to produce the spreadsheets' metadata and to produce "unlocked" versions of those spreadsheets. The court held, "when a party is ordered to produce electronic documents as they are maintained in the ordinary course of business, the producing party should produce the electronic documents with their metadata intact, unless that party timely objects to production of metadata, the parties agree that the metadata should not be produced, or the producing party requests a protective order."