Anna Mercado Clark leads Phillips Lytle's Data Privacy and Cybersecurity and e-Discovery practices, co-leads its Cryptocurrency and Blockchain team, and serves on the firm's Governing Committee as Partner and Chief Information Security Officer. Her practice spans data privacy and cybersecurity, e-discovery, business litigation, white collar defense and government investigations, intellectual property, and international business law.
Jeff Martin is a certified Digital Forensics Expert with over 20 years of experience and a Digital Evidence Expert Witness at Evidence Solutions, Inc. He specializes in cell phone forensics, computer forensics, cybersecurity, EMR/EHR forensics, and audio/video/imagery forensics, and has conducted hundreds of digital forensics investigations involving the acquisition, preservation, and analysis of data in state and federal courts.
Live Video-Broadcast: September 22, 2026
Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs
Your Opponent's Texts Are Deleting Themselves — and So Are Your Client's
Custodians now do business on Signal, WhatsApp, Slack, and auto-deleting SMS — platforms built to erase their own records. Courts applying Rule 37(e) no longer treat auto-deletion as a technical accident. DOJ, FTC, SEC, and EC enforcement actions are reshaping hold obligations from the moment the duty to preserve attaches.
The consequences are already on the books. Leave auto-delete running after a hold, and the timing itself becomes circumstantial evidence of intent to deprive. Miss Rule 37(e)'s reasonable steps, and exposure climbs from curative measures to adverse inference instructions. Epic v. Google, FTC v. Amazon, and Safelite v. Lockridge show how compliance failures become sanctions records. A Rule 30(b)(6) deposition on hold practices can dismantle a defense built after the fact.
You walk out with work product, not theory. Take home a motion-building checklist grounded in the most significant 2024–2025 decisions. Apply a working framework for designing, issuing, and documenting holds that withstand sanctions scrutiny in federal court. That practitioner judgment is what no automated summary can supply.
Key topics to be discussed:
This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.
Date / Time: September 22, 2026
Closed-captioning available
Anna Mercado Clark, Partner and Chief Information Security Officer | Phillips Lytle LLP
Anna Mercado Clark leads Phillips Lytle’s Data Privacy and Cybersecurity and e-Discovery practices, co-leads its Cryptocurrency and Blockchain team, and serves on the firm’s Governing Committee as Partner and Chief Information Security Officer. Her practice spans data privacy and cybersecurity, e-discovery, business litigation, white collar defense and government investigations, intellectual property, and international business law.
Ms. Mercado Clark earned her J.D. from Fordham University School of Law in 2005 and her B.A. from Rutgers University in 2002. She is admitted in New York and New Jersey, before the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern, Northern, Southern, and Western Districts of New York and the District of New Jersey, and before the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Second and Eleventh Circuits. She holds the CIPP/E, CIPP/US, and CIPM certifications and is a Fellow of Information Privacy (FIP).
Her work has been recognized in Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business (2026) and by The Legal 500 US, which ranked her Tier 1 in Cybersecurity, City Elite – New York (2026). She was named among the Corporate Counsel Business Journal’s 50 Women to Watch (2026), was selected to New York Metro Super Lawyers from 2021 through 2025 and became an International Association of Privacy Professionals Information Privacy Fellow in 2021.
She is a past president of the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association and a founding member of the Filipino American Lawyers Association of New York. She serves on Law360’s Cybersecurity & Privacy Editorial Advisory Board (2022–2026), participates in the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM), including its GDPR project, and is active in the American Bar Association’s Business Law and Science & Technology Law Sections and as a Special Advisor to its Commission on Women in the Profession. She has also served on the Steering Committee of the Collaborative Bar Leadership Academy, including as its Vice Chair in 2023.
A former Assistant District Attorney, Ms. Mercado Clark also teaches as an adjunct professor at Fordham University School of Law, where her courses include Fundamental Lawyering Skills and Privacy and Security. She writes and speaks frequently on cybersecurity, privacy, artificial intelligence, and litigation topics.
Jeff Martin, Senior Digital Forensics Analyst and Expert Witness | Evidence Solutions
Jeff Martin is a certified Digital Forensics Expert with over 20 years of experience and a Digital Evidence Expert Witness at Evidence Solutions, Inc. He specializes in cell phone forensics, computer forensics, cybersecurity, EMR/EHR forensics, and audio/video/imagery forensics, and has conducted hundreds of digital forensics investigations involving the acquisition, preservation, and analysis of data in state and federal courts. Before joining Evidence Solutions, he served as an Advanced Digital Forensic Analyst with the Michigan State Police Computer Crimes Unit and earlier spent a decade as Chief Information & Security Officer in the financial industry. He is a licensed private investigator in Arizona, Texas, and Michigan.
Martin holds a B.S. in Computer Information Systems from Northern Michigan University and an M.S. in Cyber Security & Information Assurance from Davenport University. His certifications include Certified Forensic Computer Examiner (CFCE), Cellebrite Certified Logical Operator, Cellebrite Certified Physical Analyst, Magnet Certified Forensic Examiner, X-Ways and Advanced X-Ways training, and Hawk Analytics cellular technology, mapping, and analysis training.
He maintained a 100% conviction rate across his caseload with the Michigan State Police, and received an award for analyzing vehicle GPS data, cell tower triangulation, and cellphone records to locate a homicide victim buried in a remote forest.
Martin is a faculty instructor at Northern Michigan University and Davenport University and an adjunct instructor teaching Cybercrime & Digital Forensics and the Computer Hacking Forensic Investigator (CHFI) certification course, as well as digital forensics search and seizure at the police academy. He serves as a certification coach for the CFCE credential through IACIS, has trained a dedicated group of judges, magistrates, and attorneys in digital evidence, and is a member of Michigan InfraGard, the Northern Michigan University Cyber Security Advisory Council, and IACIS.
His forensic caseload spans over 550 drive imaging examinations, over 700 cellular phone analyses, and over 500 external media devices. He has qualified as an expert in digital forensics examinations in numerous jurisdictions across the United States and in the Cayman Islands. Earlier in his career he served from 1995 to 2007 in the United States Army and Michigan Army National Guard as a military police, protective services, and military intelligence officer.
SESSION 1 – Building the Sanctions Motion When Messages Auto-Delete | 12:00pm – 1:00pm
This session walks attorneys through the evidentiary and procedural framework for building a winning spoliation sanctions motion when opposing parties have lost or destroyed text messages, chats, or other ephemeral communications through auto-delete functions. Attendees will learn the two-tier Rule 37(e) structure, how courts distinguish negligent deletion from intent to deprive, and the specific evidentiary record—forensic, documentary, and deposition-based—needed to support sanctions ranging from curative measures to adverse inference instructions. Attorneys leave with a practical motion-building checklist grounded in the most significant 2024–2025 decisions.
BREAK | 1:00pm – 1:10pm
SESSION 2 – Litigation Holds and Preservation Defense for Messaging Platforms | 1:10pm – 2:10pm
This session examines how to build and defend a legally sufficient litigation hold when custodians communicate on ephemeral and auto-deleting messaging platforms. Attorneys will learn what courts now require under Rule 37(e) including platform-specific instructions, administrator-level auto-delete suspension, and compliance monitoring — and will analyze the compliance failures in Epic v. Google, FTC v. Amazon, and Safelite v. Lockridge. Attendees leave with a working framework for designing, issuing, and documenting holds that withstand sanctions scrutiny in federal court.
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved via Attorney Submission
2 General Hours
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)
No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Not Eligible
2 General Hours
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Approved via Attorney Submission
2 Law & Legal Hours
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General