Am I correct in determining the court's reasoning in the case Mirmina v. Genpact LLC., in determining that the internal collection of potentially relevant data was reasonable??

The court clarified that counsel supervised ("coordinated and overseen") custodian searching for responsive data is defensible, no factual evidence of foul play was presented. When the defendant was asked to conduct an additional search for (ESI) and went outside the agreed e-discovery protocol, the plaintiff was "concerned" that the defendant "withheld communications" that were responsive. The defendant's concerns centered around letting counsel rely "upon an employee directly involved in the underlying claims of the suit to search her own emails for responsive documents." In response, the defendant argued that the search for responsive files was "coordinated and overseen by counsel," which complies with acceptable preservation practices.