| Time | Session | Panelists |
| | Monday, 8 January | |
| 18:00 — 20:00 | Welcome reception | |
| | Tuesday, 9 January | |
| 7:45 — 8:45 | Sign-in | |
| 8:45 — 9:00 | Welcome and Overview | Mancari, Shonka, Weinlein |
| 9:00 — 10:15 | Internal investigations | |
| | The panel will lead a dialogue with all attendees on whether WG6 should draft a supplement to The Sedona Conference International Investigations Principles (“Principles”) or a stand-alone Commentary that provides practical and current guidance for issues not addressed in Principles, such as the involvement of AI and other current, applicable technologies, as well as changes in laws that may present new concerns. The feedback during the panel will be instructive as to whether WG6 will move forward with a brainstorming group on this topic and if so, the topics to be included. | Mancari, Robinson, Stein, Thomas* |
| 10:15 — 10:30 | Morning Break | |
| 10:30 — 11:45 | Cross-border data and information governance - practical considerations for global compliance | |
| | A panel of WG6 drafting team members will lead a dialogue with all attendees on their first draft of a Commentary on Cross-Border Data and Information Governance: Practical Considerations for Global Compliance (“draft Commentary”). The intent of the draft Commentary is to provide guidance to corporate stakeholders, the bench, and the bar on myriad decisions and activities an organization must consider when implementing a cross-border information governance program intended to optimize the balance between the competing demands of ongoing retention of information to meet business, legal, and regulatory demands, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the timely disposition of aged or sensitive information—including disposing of personal data to effectuate recognized data protection principles of data minimization and storage limits and fulfill legitimate data subject access requests. | Brady, Greco, Mandel*, Strauss, Wagner, Wilkinson |
| 11:45 — 13:00 | Preservation in modern communication and collaboration platforms | |
| | When the duty to preserve data arises, organizations face the complex task of determining what to preserve. Preserving every potentially relevant document in existence is often neither reasonable nor proportional. This challenge intensifies when collaboration platforms, such as Microsoft Teams, are used across global enterprises with separate, but linked, corporate entities spanning multiple borders and jurisdictions. The scoping of preservation efforts often touch upon conflicting legal obligations and rights including data privacy rights. The panel will lead a dialogue on solutions to (1) navigate international tensions that may arise during preservation efforts and (2) incorporate the principles of reasonableness and proportionality, specifically within collaboration platforms. | Dubin, Hendley, Hoffman*, Robinson, Hon. Rodriguez |
| 13:00 — 14:00 | Lunch | |
| 14:00 — 15:30 | Data protection authority (DPA) roundtable | |
| | Global DPAs will lead a dialogue on their respective challenges and priorities in both their enforcement and advisory roles under global data protection regimes. The dialogue will also address technological developments and data transfer mechanisms (e.g., SCCs; EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework). | Breitbarth, Buchta, Gencarelli, Gerlach*, Scorza, Talus |
| 15:30 — 15:45 | Afternoon Break | |
| 15:45 — 17:00 | Town hall | |
| | WG6 Steering Committee members will lead a dialogue amongst the WG6 members in attendance on progress made on the work product of the Working Group, and by the Working Group as a whole. WG6 member input will be sought regarding the future direction of WG6, including ideas for existing and new commentaries and projects. | Gerlach, Hoffman, Mancari, Mandel, Shonka*, Wilkinson |
| 17:00 — 19:00 | Reception (guests invited) | |
| | Wednesday, 10 January | |
| 8:00 — 9:00 | Sign-in | |
| 9:00 — 10:15 | Proportionality in cross-border discovery |
| | The drafting team will lead a dialogue on its draft Commentary on the applicability of the Rule 26(b)(1) proportionality analysis to cross-border discovery involving non-U.S. data protection laws and regulations. A number of U.S. courts have used a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) proportionality analysis to determine whether information residing outside the U.S. that is subject to foreign data protection or other laws restricting disclosure is discoverable in U.S. litigation. The Sedona Conference International Litigation Principles provides guidance on balancing potential conflicts between U.S. litigation requirements and non-U.S. data protection laws, and specifically references Rule 26(b)(1) in this context. There is no stand-alone guidance on these issues from The Sedona Conference, however, and this draft Commentary on Proportionality in Cross-Border Discovery would fill that void. | Calvert, Meyers*, Hon. Rodriguez, Thomas |
| 10:15 — 11:30 | Exporting data from the People's Republic of China | |
| | A panel of WG6 drafting team members will lead a dialogue with all attendees on their draft Commentary on Exporting Data from the People’s Republic of China (“draft Commentary”). The draft Commentary addresses the current landscape of laws and regulations, the challenges, and potential avenues for best practices for compliance in the PRC. The draft Commentary (1) provides an overview of the landscape of new and existing (and forthcoming) privacy and data security regulations; (2) addresses the challenges presented by the existing and evolving privacy and data security laws and regulations; and (3) provides current best practices and guidance for complying with these laws and regulations while exporting data from the PRC in connection with legal matters outside of the PRC. | Gill, Priselac, Solomon*, Yu |
| 11:30 — 11:45 | Morning Break | |
| 11:45 — 13:00 | Operationalizing the Hague Evidence Convention and other mechanisms for cross-border data transfers | |
| | A panel of WG6 drafting team members will lead a dialogue with all attendees on their draft Commentary on Operationalizing the Hague Evidence Convention and other Mechanisms for Cross-Border Data Transfers (“draft Commentary”). The draft Commentary addresses The Hague Evidence Convention’s (“Convention”) potential to further advance discovery in civil litigation and ways that potential might be advanced. In particular, the draft Commentary explores the use of Letters Rogatory under Chapter 1 of the Convention and the use of Commissioners and Special Masters under Chapter 2 of the Convention; it is also explores the use of MOUs and MLATs and the limits of those agreements in dealing with blocking statutes, data protection laws, and other impediments to the unfettered flow of information across borders. The draft Commentary addresses how those devices are, or may be, (mis)used to impair or impede cross-border transfers for litigation. | Brady*, Costello, Dubin, Meyers, Shonka |
| 13:00 — 14:00 | Lunch | |
