Government Recognized Experts in Antitrust and Securities Investigations

About Us

Our Experience


 TFG has successfully assisted staff counsel with cases involving government agencies, such as the Department of Justice and the FDIC. We work on a variety of legal matters, from small investigations to those that require large teams of attorneys and accountants reviewing electronic data of all types. Expertise includes government investigations, bankruptcy reviews, Hart-Scot-Rodino merger review, intellectual property theft, securities investigations, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act compliance matters, and class action litigation.

Why Us?


  Our team is made up of professional case managers, legal experts and technology gurus. Together we are experts in litigation support, regulatory inquiries and investigations in electronic discovery matters for corporations and the most respected legal firms. We have led numerous large-scale electronic discovery cases as well as computer forensics matters. Many were investigative cases involving government subpoenas and internal investigations.

Kris Haworth, Managing Director

  Kris Haworth is one of the nation’s premier computer forensics experts with nearly two decades of experience as an attorney and professional experience in the technology industry. She provides expert and consulting services in forensics and electronic discovery services to clients from high-performing start-ups to Fortune 500 companies retained by many of the country’s most respected law firms. Ms. Haworth served as a Managing Director at FTI Consulting.  Managing Director at LECG in the investigative services practice. Director leading the west coast investigative services for Navigant Consulting. Senior Manager in charge of Deloitte’s national electronic discovery practice. She has worked on many landmark cases as both an expert and a consultant. She is the founder of The Forensics Group and works with a team of professionals that specialize in computer forensics, electronic discovery, and data analysis.


Public cases


 State Bar of Nevada vs. Stephen Castronova
JAMS Inc. vs. Kevin Kinsella
McAfee, Inc. Shareholder Litigation  
Lucero LLC. vs. Dale T. Boutiette; Boutiette + Von Hermann, LLP
Miracle Flight for Kids vs. Med Lien Management, Inc.  
Resendez vs. Smith’s Food & Drug Center, Inc.
Gardner vs. Hewko 

Landmark cases

 World Courier v. Barone, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31714 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 16, 2007).

The husband of a defendant admitted destroying a hard drive on a computer at the couple's residence, which contained a copy of plaintiff's data. The court decided sanctions that included an adverse inference jury instruction and plaintiff's fees and costs in obtaining the sanctions were warranted. The affirmative duty of a party to preserve evidence extended to evidence "not directly within the party's custody or control so long as the party has access to or indirect control over such evidence."

Trigon Ins. Co. v. United States, 204 F.R.D. 277, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18824, 88 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 6883, 51 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 378, 57 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (CBC) 664 (E.D. Va. Nov. 9, 2001).

 In the case, the United States was sanctioned for destruction of evidence by a retained litigation consultant. The court determined that the United States had a duty to preserve the documents, but took no steps to preserve them. Nor could it blame the consultant's document retention policy; the policy conflicted with the rules governing litigation, and so would not shield the government from a finding of intentional destruction of evidence. Ultimately, computer forensics experts were able to retrieve much of the destroyed information.

Playboy Enterprises Inc. v. Welles, 60 F. Supp. 2d 1050, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12895, 45 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 981 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 1999).

Playboy sued ex-Playmate Terri Welles, alleging Welles' use of the Playboy name and logo on her personal website infringed upon its trademarks. Welles counterclaimed for defamation and interference with prospective business advantage. Welles admitted during discovery that she had routinely deleted email communications during the course of the litigation, despite Playboy's requests for production seeking such documents. Playboy therefore moved the court for an order compelling Welles to provide Playboy access to her computer hard drive so Playboy could make a "mirror image" of the drive and review the emails for responsive items.  The court ruled that the information on the defendant's hard drive was discoverable and granted access to Welles’ hard drive to recover deleted emails.