Essays

Migrated from eDJGroupInc.com. Author: Barry Murphy. Published: 2012-08-02 09:00:02  The last two Cowen Group (TCG) Leadership Breakfasts (in New York and Washington, DC) established that TAR is a disruptive force that can benefit corporate legal departments, law firms, and solution providers.  With the notion of benefits all around, we took the breakfast to Los Angeles where the conversation around TAR was markedly different, but [...]

Migrated from eDJGroupInc.com. Author: Kevin L. Nichols. Published: 2012-08-06 09:00:53  Whether it is self-imposed or the industry standard to attend certain “trade show” style conferences, the Carmel Valley eDiscovery Retreat (“CVeDR”), truly was a “retreat” from the norm.  Despite the obvious, which was enjoying the beautiful setting of Monterey while hovering over the ocean, the conference attracted many “heavy hitters” in the industry such [...]

Technology-Assisted Review (TAR) is not simply a hyped up market category. In fact, I predicted late last year that 2012 would be the year that TAR goes mainstream. That prediction was based on data from an eDJ Group survey that found that by the end of 2012, market penetration for the TAR technique predictive coding should be over 50%. In getting beyond the hype of the Da Silva Moore and Kleen Products cases, I have had the opportunity to speak with several end users about their experiences with predictive coding and other forms of TAR. Those stories will be featured in an upcoming report from eDJ Group.

Following the country-wide tour of The Cowen Group (TCG) Leadership Breakfasts is proving to be valuable and interesting. There are commonalities in each city, such as the fact that most attendees realize that technology-assisted review (TAR) is the inevitable future of legal review and presents new economic opportunities for corporations, law firms, and service providers alike. But, the breakfasts in each city each have a unique local flavor.

Migrated from eDJGroupInc.com. Author: Amber Scorah. Published: 2012-08-09 09:00:39  INTERVIEW WITH Chad P. Brouillard, Esq., Attorney, Foster & Eldridge, LLPIn the past, state and federal auditing environments have not been very aggressive in ensuring compliance with HIPAA and the HITECH Act, but that is changing. Government regulators are increasing their audit frequency and fine amounts.Although many health facilities have invested in high-tech records management [...]

Migrated from eDJGroupInc.com. Author: Mikki Tomlinson. Published: 2012-08-09 09:00:52  The Executive Counsel Institute (ECI) Corporate Exchange programs are always excellent.  Not only are the discussions educational and informative, they are important.  The New York event that took place on July 16-17, 2012, was no exception.  Here is my take on a few of the program highlights.Information Governance:  While there was not a session dedicated [...]

Each of The Cowen Group (TCG) Leadership Breakfasts has its own unique feel. While there are many common discussion points, such as the disruptive nature of Technology Assisted Review (TAR), the need for new skills like project management, and the desire to capture the cost savings TAR promises; each event takes on a life of its own. The Chicago Leadership Breakfast was no different – there was discussion about the benefits of TAR and the challenges to widespread adoption, but there was a more pragmatic feel to the overall discussion and an emphasis on metrics that can prove the value of TAR. It was actually a perfect way to head into the hiatus before the next breakfasts in Atlanta and Minneapolis in September.

I always enjoy meeting other super geeks who revel in playing on the cutting edge of discovery technology. While I will reserve the ‘geek’ label for myself, my conversation on TAR with David D. Lewis was definitely a highlight at the Carmel Valley eDiscovery Retreat. Now I owe David for bringing the recent Actos Products case management order to my attention (MDL No. 6:11-md-2299). The order lays out the agreed upon protocol for a “Search Methodology Proof of Concept” to test Equivio’s Relevance predictive coding on 4 of 29 custodian’s ESI as a possible substitute for traditional manual review of the entire collection. Once you get into the specific email protocol (Section E) the order starts to read like it could have been copied directly from a savvy provider’s procedural manual. Now don’t get me wrong, the parties are using this process as a ‘proof of concept’ limited to four custodian’s email to see if they can apply these analytics to the broader potential ESI collection. There are lots of mandatory meet and confer check points along the process where either side could raise concerns or essentially bring the process back to the bench, but I am guessing that this train has left the station.

Migrated from eDJGroupInc.com. Author: Kevin L. Nichols. Published: 2012-08-15 12:00:11  At the start of what would have been a normal day at work, I learned that I received an invitation to attend an eDiscovery related breakfast that was set to start in 30 minutes.  Luckily it was located a block away from my office, at the historic City Club in San Francisco (which features [...]

The story about Michigan State Police officers collecting forensic snapshots of mobile phones during traffic stops back in April kicked off my long research journey into whether corporate mobile discovery was really feasible. After lengthy interviews with leading experts in mobile phone forensics, I can assure you that a full physical acquisition of your iPhone, iPad, BlackBerry or Android device is just not going to happen during a typical 30 minute custodian interview or a traffic stop. The connectors and communication protocols of mobile devices were not designed for high speed data exports that we have come to expect from enterprise back up systems and disk imaging devices like Logicube. The ‘pipe’ is just too small to copy 8+ GB without taking custody of the device. You can grab the active call log, text messages and other phone elements quickly, but that kind of logical extraction may not suffice to ‘preserve’ your custodian’s ESI in some matters, especially if that device may be the only source of deleted items that are critical to proving your case.