On the issue of self-collection, when the Court says not to “rely on a defendant to search their own e-mail system” and “we don’t rely on people who are defendants to decide what documents are responsive,” I believe the Court refers specifically to the practice of a client acting as document reviewer and sole arbiter of responsiveness. That is well understood to be a bad practice, so there is nothing shocking about this pronouncement.
E-Discovery project management thought leaders suggest that at a bare minimum ESI collection is completed with meaningful supervision.
Another recent blog post discusses why self-collection is increasingly not a best e-discovery management practice.
Update: one more blogger reviews a case regarding the dangers of self-collection here