In Williams v. Angie’s List, Inc., No. 1:16-cv-00878 (S.D. Ind. Apr. 10, 2017), 48 individual plaintiffs sought transactions data from defendant’s sales platform vendor, SalesForce, to support their claim that defendant had instructed them to underreport their overtime hours on their usual computerized time records, a violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). After producing one year’s worth of SalesForce ESI, defendant refused to produce data from an additional two years. The court found that the SalesForce ESI was relevant to plaintiffs’ claims of unreported hours because at least some SalesForce transactions data could be identified as manually entered outside plaintiffs’ regular work hours, indicating that plaintiffs had been working despite no entries in their usual computerized time records. Furthermore, the court held over defendant’s objection that defendant controlled the ESI because it was recorded in the course of defendant’s contractual relationship with SalesForce and defendant had a legal right to obtain the ESI. The court further refused to shift the cost of the ESI production to plaintiffs, reasoning that defendant had already negotiated with SalesForce to reduce its asking price for one year’s worth of transactions data from $90,000 to $15,000, and SalesForce’s asking price of $30,000 for the additional two years’ worth of data was “easily outstripped by the amount in controversy” in a claim brought by 48 plaintiffs for three years’ worth of back pay.