The data that were lost in CSI Investment Partners II, L.P. v. Cendant Corp., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66353 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 7, 2007), were lost in a data conversion process that took place before this lawsuit was filed. The defendant argued that it could not be sanctioned for spoliation for data lost before it was on notice of the plaintiffs’ claim. But the critical lost data included two years’ worth of financial information that the defendant was contractually obliged to maintain under the Stock Purchase Agreement it had with the plaintiffs. District Judge Deborah A. Batts concluded, in an alternative holding, that the contractual duty to preserve the data placed the defendant on notice of the need to avoid spoliating the data, even if the defendant ‛did not have an obligation at that time to preserve these records for purposes of this lawsuit.“ Perhaps more important to the sanctions decision, however, was the defendant’s failure for three and a half years to admit having lost the data, instead interposing frivolous and vexatious objections for which it was separately sanctioned. The Court noted that, despite its having admonished the defendant to avoid discovery disputes and that bringing a summary judgment motion would be viewed as a dilatory tactic, the defendant proceeded to resist discovery, lost another three discovery disputes before the magistrate judge, and filed a losing summary judgment motion. Held, 15% of plaintiffs’ $4.8 million in attorneys' fees awarded, or $720,000, under the inherent power of the court and Fed.R.Civ.P. 37.