There's a difference between an unsuccessful lawsuit and a frivolous one (i.e. one without merit, intended to harm or extort). All evidence indicates that she made the claims in good faith.

The purpose of discovery in these cases is that you don't know what has been said about you. That's why, if you think you might be a victim of discrimination, you often have to sue in order to get that information.

In her particular case, she found no proof. That said, she couldn't have possibly known before the discovery process that it wouldn't be there.

If she were sifting through the files to find breaches of irrelevant, outdated laws and regulations, that'd be a fishing expedition. In this case, the communications that were discovered were relevant to her (justified, because even though she wasn't able to prove gender discrimination, she did prove that, except for John Doerr, they were unprofessional and horrible toward her) grievance.