In what is becoming a recurring outcome, a federal magistrate judge in New Mexico denied a request for a plaintiff’s pain journal in its native format because it was not requested in its original form. As detailed in a former post, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34 and many state rules, a party need only produce electronic documents in one format and if no production format is specified, the producing party need only produce documents as ordinarily maintained or in a “reasonably usable form.” In Perea v. Conner, No. Civ.-13-0697 KG/LAM (D. N.M. September 26, 2014), relying in large part on Rule 34, the court refused to order the plaintiff to produce a word processing document containing pain journal entries because the plaintiff had already produced a .pdf copy of the journal. The court also refused to order production because the defendant failed to specifically request the original electronic copy of the pain journal and did not ask for its related metadata. The court noted that under Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 34(b), if a party requesting documents does not specify the format in which the documents are to be produced, they need only be produced in one, reasonably usable form. The court stated that the .pdf copy of the pain journal satisfied the requirements of Rule 34 and that the defendant had not shown that the copy plaintiff produced was incomplete or inaccurate.