Legal Talk Network Producer Laurence Colletti interviews electronic evidence expert Craig Ball at the 2015 Winter Meeting of The Florida Bar. Ball discusses the limitations of electronic search tools and how lawyers need to move past the delusion of the right keywords yielding perfect results.
If you can spare less than a minute to learn about this impressive new technology, this is a 42-second animation that describes how visual classification works and how it can help your organization launch and complete classification-dependent initiatives like assigning retention and disposition schedules, file share remediation, archive digitization, content migration, and silo consolidation.
While there are legitimate concerns about finding IP in data, because data may be an inert lump of code, bits, or pieces of information, it is worthwhile to think about the different kinds of IP that arise in conjunction with and in the context of Big Data.
Intellectual Property litigation presents a number of unique discovery and review challenges for the involved attorneys, law firms, and in-house counsel, corporations and organizations. Legal issues can require analysis not only of patent, copyright and trademark law, but complex contract and joint venture, development and entity issues. Also modern IP cases often are international in scope. The subject matter being disputed in IP cases can be highly variable, with litigation spanning industries like biotechnology and pharmaceuticals to electronics manufacturing and advanced software algorithms.
With no user fees, case fees, or hidden costs, Lexbe eDiscovery Platform provides a litigation document management solution that allows corporate counsel to maintain control over discovery collections at a low and predictable monthly cost. Our web-based system can be accessed from any browser and across both PC and MAC operating systems to allow for fast, real-time collaboration between internal legal staff and outside counsel.
Founded in 2011 as DW Legal and based in Houston, TX, BeyondReview is a data-driven discovery services company that uses visual classification technology and expert review attorneys to deliver end-to-end discovery with power, precision and speed.
Lawyers, law firms, and companies engaged in securities litigation or securities fraud cases face a number of unique challenges. First, these cases typically involve many parties, custodians and documents — page counts can often be in the tens of millions. But these cases must still be prosecuted in standard court timeframes, so often a lot needs to be done in just a little bit of time.
The Lexbe eDiscovery Processing System (LEPS) converted the entire 53 GBs of the EDRM Enron Dataset, with 5 million page equivalents, into industry-standard TIFF images in only 5.3 hours. To accomplish this task in this short time, LEPS programmatically deployed and utilized over 60 parallel server instances, and maintained a sustained throughput rate of 240 GBs/day (23 Million pages/day) for Native to TIFF processing.
Frustrated Court Crafts “New and Simpler Approach to Discovery,” Identifies Search Terms to be Utilized by Plaintiff
In this breach of contract case, the court granted in part Defendant’s motion to compel and, in light of Plaintiff’s piecemeal production (which the court had earlier cautioned against) and other discovery failures, fashioned a “new and simpler approach” to discovery, including the identification of 13 search terms/phrases to be utilized when searching “ALL [of Plaintiff’s] corporate documents, files, communications, and recordings. . .”
“Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position. But certainty is an absurd one.” VOLTAIRE In legal search you can never know exactly what recall level you have attained. You can only know a probable range of recall. For instance, you can never know that you have attained 80% recall, but you can know that you have attained between 70% and 90% recall. Even the range is a probable range, not certain. Exact knowledge of recall is impossible because there are too many documents in legal search to ever know for certain how many of them are relevant, and how many are irrelevant.
Whether producing in Native, TIFF, PDF, or a blended format, discovery productions are fraught with potential challenges and obstacles that can foil your ability to meet deadlines and satisfy discovery requirements. Avoid common pitfalls and discover innovative solutions to flawlessly execute your production.
Review costs continue to be the dominant portion of discovery expenditure for corporate legal departments and law firms involved in large-scale litigation and government investigations. As the number of documents to be reviewed in any given case continues to grow exponentially, the time to review them has not. The challenge of finding cost-efficient solutions to complete large review assignments on time and within budget becomes more pressing each year. Outsourced managed review is a favored option in many large document cases to bring specialized review expertise and staffing to bear to handle large-scale productions, privilege review, redactions, and issue coding.
Review costs continue to be the dominant portion of discovery expenditure for firms involved in complex litigation. As the volume of documents to be reviewed in any given case continues to grow exponentially, the challenge of finding a cost-efficient solution to complete large review assignments become more pressing. In addition to the high direct costs of traditional staffing, firms feel the pain of hiring each new contract reviewer through added user fees, licensing costs, and increased overhead.
eDiscovery and legal document management should be platform independent. Litigators should not need to inconvenience themselves with inefficient workarounds and incompatible software.
There’s never been a phenomenon like Docker . Eighteen months ago, the company took its core technology, which enables IT people to move software easily between different machines by enclosing it in “containers”, and made it open source.
Rolling intelligence is the enterprise-level equivalent of pay it forward. Effort invested in one business unit, functional area, or type of document storage to visually classify documents benefits the other units, areas, or types of storage that are processed later on. It is the gift that keeps on giving. The reason is that there is a heavy overlap on the types of documents that are used or stored in different areas of an enterprise.
As the size of document collections continue to explode, finding the evidence needle in the ESI haystack is more challenging than ever. Understanding the latest tools, indexing techniques, and features associated with advanced eDiscovery keyword search will allow you to conduct a highly effective review while still delivering your production on time.
“Free eDiscovery Processing” sounds too good to be true. Until now, you may have spent many hundreds of dollars per GB to process native documents like Outlook Email and Microsoft Office files into paginated reviewable formats like TIFF or PDF. So how can those charges simply disappear? The revolutionary answer lies with Lexbe’s secure, scalable cloud technology.
Perhaps the most important conclusion of the study was that an advanced TAR 2.0 protocol, continuous active learning (CAL), proved to be far more effective than the two standard TAR 1.0 protocols used by most of the early products on the market today—simple passive learning (SPL) and simple active learning (SAL).
In a recent blog post on cross-border e-discovery, Sasha L. Hefler and Chris Dale discuss the differences between discovery in the United States and abroad, and the resulting challenges. As they point out, discovery in the United States is much more broad than other common law countries, which put limits on discovery in terms of scope—requiring proportionality—and use of personally identifiable information and other private data. While such differences in approach pose challenges in terms of cross-border discovery, these differences may also hold lessons to be learned for those looking to achieve more reasonable and proportionate discovery here in the United States.
Whether producing in Native, TIFF, PDF, or a blended format, discovery productions are fraught with potential challenges and obstacles that can foil your ability to meet deadlines and satisfy discovery requirements. Here we present 10 of the most common mistakes litigation professionals can encounter, as well as best practices to avoid them.
By Bernard Marr We surely see a lot of hype surrounding big data but I believe the following 25 facts speak for themselves and help to paint a realistic picture of the phenomenon we now call ‘Big Data’ – a phenomenon that is changing the world as we know it. Every 2 days we create […]
Storage of Big Data–and particularly unstructured data such as video, PPT presentations, and Word documents that do not fit into a database–has been the subject of considerable discussion. While proper, secure storage was a natural evolution in the Big Data debate lifecycle, it is now merely a precondition to much higher orders of analysis and business intelligence. In this respect, the Big Data remains too small in many minds.
91% of firms engaged in litigation continue to use TIFFs as a favored review format. On the one hand, TIFFs are a standardized, reviewable format that litigation professionals are comfortable with. On the other, TIFF processing requires tremendous computing resources and, as a result, has traditionally been slow and expensive. As the size of collections continue to explode, there is additional pressure to process more native documents into TIFF – and fast.