The Standard for In Camera Review

The Standard for In Camera Review
Image: EDRM.

[EDRM Editor’s Note: The opinions and positions are those of Michael D. Berman.]

“The standard for in camera review is not high, but it’s not nothing either, and the Court doesn’t think it’s been met here.”  BSD Crown, LTD v. Amazon.Com, Inc., 2026 WL 2644130 (N.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2026).  Given the roles of the communicating individuals, “there is nothing suspicious about these work product claims.”

BSD Crown demonstrates that a request for in camera review—like every other discovery motion—should be supported by a detailed factual predicate.

For additional information on requests for in camera review, please see:

Assisted by GAI and LLM Technologies per EDRM’s GAI and LLM Policy.

Author

  • Michael Berman

    Michael Berman is a practicing lawyer and an adjunct faculty member at the University of Baltimore School of Law.  He has published extensively, including as the editor-in-chief and a contributing author in “Electronically Stored Information in Maryland Courts” (Maryland State Bar Ass’n. 2020), co-editing two American Bar Association books on electronic discovery, as well as co-authoring law review and other articles regarding electronically stored information (“ESI”).  He has presented widely in venues ranging from local to National events and served as a Court Appointed ESI Discovery Supervisor for ESI Protocol.

    View all posts Owner, E-Discovery LLC