eDiscoveryDaily

When it comes to eDiscovery, no two practice areas are alike. Attorneys working in construction law and intellectual property (IP) law face unique data challenges that make efficient review and case preparation difficult without the right technology. CloudNine Review was built to simplify these complexities, helping legal teams save time, reduce costs, and stay ahead of the curve.

The Challenges of eDiscovery in Construction Law

Construction law cases often involve highly complex disputes from contract disagreements to defect claims and delay litigation. These cases typically require the collection and review of:

• Massive volumes of communication: Contractors, subcontractors, architects, engineers, and project managers often rely on text messages, project management tools, and emails to track progress and resolve issues.
• Multiple data formats: Building information models (BIM), CAD drawings, PDFs, spreadsheets, and photos all become relevant in construction disputes.
• Multiple stakeholders: Large projects mean a wide swath of custodians, each producing different data types.

The result? A mountain of unstructured data that needs to be reviewed quickly and accurately to uncover timelines, communications, and responsibilities.

The Challenges of eDiscovery in Intellectual Property Law

IP litigation, whether involving trade secrets, patents, or trademarks, presents another layer of complexity. These cases often include:

• Highly technical documents: Source code, product designs, research data, and scientific reports.
• Global data sources: Custodians may be spread across international teams, with data stored in different locations and subject to varying privacy regulations.
• Confidential and sensitive information: IP cases require careful handling of proprietary information to avoid exposure.

IP attorneys must sift through vast amounts of technical and confidential material while ensuring compliance with protective orders and discovery protocols.

How CloudNine Review Simplifies the Process

CloudNine Review is designed to tackle the modern data challenges of both construction law and intellectual property law:

• Support for all communication types: Review text messages, emails, chat platforms, and project management data in one platform. This is critical for construction cases, where texts and emails often hold the key evidence.
• Scalable review for large datasets: Whether you’re dealing with terabytes of project documentation or years of technical research, CloudNine Review scales to handle cases of any size.
• Advanced search and filtering: Narrow down to the documents that matter most with powerful filtering and metadata search capabilities, speeding up fact development.
• Data security and confidentiality: CloudNine’s secure cloud platform ensures sensitive IP assets and proprietary data are protected throughout the discovery lifecycle.
• Flexible workflows: Tailor review sets to your case needs, whether you’re prioritizing communication timelines in a construction case or reviewing technical documents in IP litigation.

The Bottom Line

Both construction law and intellectual property law demand a streamlined approach to eDiscovery. With vast data volumes, multiple custodians, and unique file types, legal teams in these areas can’t afford inefficiency. CloudNine Review makes it possible to organize, review, and analyze evidence with confidence—helping attorneys focus less on managing data and more on building winning strategies.

Insights from the Masters Conference – Denver | June 24, 2025 | Hosted by Fennemore Craig PC  | Article by Sheila Sadaghiani

Last week at The Masters Conference in Denver, I sat in on a session that felt less like a legal panel and more like group therapy for those of us trying to tame the chaos of mobile data in eDiscovery. The message was clear: if you’re not thinking about mobile data, you’re already behind.

This panel was moderated by Chip Koons, CEO at Veracity Forensics and the panelists were Rick Clark, VP of Strategic Partnerships and Marketing at CloudNine, Melinda Redenius, Forensic Consultant at Veracity Forensics and Sean Solis, Counsel at BakerHostetler. This panel rounded out the perspectives of technology, forensics and the practice of law with the focus on smartphones in investigations and litigation.

Let’s face it, our smarty pants devices know everything. Who we texted, where we were, what we Googled at 2 a.m., and whether we really did hit our step count (thank you, Apple Watch). So, when a case lands on your desk and a smartphone or device is involved, and it always is, it’s time to get serious.

Phones Aren’t Just Phones Anymore

The session kicked off with a reminder that mobile devices are no longer simple communication tools. They are digital diaries overflowing with location data, app activity, messages, and maybe even a TikTok or two. That also means they are goldmines in investigations, but getting to that gold, not so easy.

Challenge #1: Privacy in a BYOD World

The ever-present Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) issue came up fast. The consensus? If you don’t have a crystal-clear policy in place, you’re setting yourself up for a compliance migraine.

Policy isn’t just a formality, it’s your defense. Require consent. Explain what’s being collected. And for the love of litigation, communicate with custodians. People get weird when you ask to peek into their phones, and can you blame them? Some even back up personal data to their iClouds, which just adds another layer of “fun.”

Also, heads up; board members are not always thrilled about handing over their devices. Shocking, I know.

One story shared involved a chemical plant incident where investigators suspected employees were texting during the event. They requested phone data leading up to and during the incident. The court said nope, calling it a fishing expedition. Moral of the story? Narrow your scope or risk reeling in an empty net.

Challenge #2: Ephemeral Everything

Next up: ephemeral data. Think Snapchat, disappearing messages, and auto-delete features that make forensic teams want to throw their phones into the nearest river.

But don’t lose hope. You can still get creative. One clever tactic mentioned was collecting data from other people the custodian communicated with. Deleted texts? Rebuild them from the other side of the conversation. Like digital duct tape.

Also, this is a big one, the Department of Justice is now specifically calling out the need to preserve ephemeral messages. So yes, your compliance program better have something to say about that.

Oh, and when you’re issuing a legal hold, spell it out. Literally. Include instructions on how to turn off auto-delete features. No assumptions.

Challenge #3: Geo-Location (aka “Where Were You Really?”)

Geo-location came up as both a powerful tool and a slippery slope. Every photo you take, some apps you open, it’s all tagging your location to the same database on the device. But here’s the twist: geo data is tied to the phone, not necessarily the person using it. So, you might know where the phone was, but can you prove who was holding it?

Still, if used wisely, location data can help build a compelling narrative. It just needs to be paired with the right context and a bit of tech wizardry.

Real Talk: No Easy Buttons

The overall vibe? There’s no magic wand here. But there are technologies that can help make sense of the chaos. Whether you’re threading messages across multiple platforms or using targeted collection tools like ModeOne, Oxygen, or Cellebrite, the key is to know your case and tailor your collection strategy accordingly. Then, review platforms like CloudNine Review will make the review experience MUCH easier than traditional document review platforms.

One case even hinged on data from a wearable fitness device. Yep, turns out those calories burned were worth more than expected in court.

Final Takeaways:

• Your mobile data strategy should be locked and loaded before discovery starts.
• Communication with custodians isn’t optional; it’s critical.
• Don’t just collect, preserve intentionally.
• And finally, get a service provider in early. This isn’t a solo mission.

So, the next time someone shrugs off mobile data as “just texts,” remind them: your phone might be the most honest (and unforgiving) witness in the room.

P.S. If you think mobile discovery is scary now, just wait until someone subpoenas your smart fridge.

Insights from the Masters Conference – Denver | June 24, 2025 | Hosted by Fennemore Craig PC

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is no longer an emerging idea in legal discovery, it’s the present reality. At The Masters Conference in Denver, Fennemore Craig PC hosted an insightful session titled “AI in eDiscovery: What Was, What Is, and What’s Coming,” led by Adrian D’Amico, Director of Emerging Technology and Innovation, and Dean Seiveno, Chief Enterprise Officer. The session offered a sweeping view of how AI has evolved in the eDiscovery space and where it’s heading next.

The Evolution: From Automation to Insight

AI began reshaping eDiscovery by doing what humans couldn’t which is rapidly processing vast volumes of data. Early adoption focused on the automation of time-consuming processes like email and chat message review, issue identification, and document summaries. These tools gave legal teams the ability to cut through digital noise faster and more efficiently than ever before.

However, D’Amico pointed out that what we’re seeing now is a far cry from basic automation. The AI landscape and the technologists creating solutions is growing at an quick pace, leaving many overwhelmed and uncertain on which solutions, workflows and platforms should be considered.

D’Amico urged attendees to recognize that the real threat to your position or practice isn’t AI itself, it’s a lack of training in how to use it effectively. “AI doesn’t replace people,” D’Amico said. “A lack of AI training is what replaces people.”

Current Capabilities: Beyond Data Culling

Today’s AI-powered eDiscovery extends well beyond initial data sorting. It now plays a role across the entire EDRM spectrum:

• Identification & Preservation of sensitive data like PII
• Collection and early data analysis strategies that surface discoverable and relevant information early
• Processing and Analysis that leverage smart clustering and thematic analysis
• Review & Production tools that can visualize communication patterns, changes in sentiment, and emerging narratives that plug into traditional review and production workflows

One significant advancement is the shift from Continuous Active Learning (CAL) to Continuous Active Prompting (CAP). Unlike CAL, which trained models based on document coding decisions, CAP relies on natural language prompts. This allows legal teams to iterate prompts, create storyboards, uncover deeper context, and even analyze audio and video files and all through conversational interfaces.

Generative AI platforms like ChatGPT can now assist in:

• Drafting correspondence
• Extracting or testing legal arguments
• Modeling damages using curated eDiscovery datasets

But, D’Amico emphasized, only use firm-approved AI tools and never use a public tool for sensitive or proprietary information to maintain compliance and security.

The Future: Agentic AI and Multimodal Discovery

Looking ahead, both panelists predicted the rise of AI agents: automated systems that act like digital assistants within the eDiscovery workflow. These “Agentic AIs” will perform tasks like:

• Drafting privilege logs
• Reviewing batches of documents
• Monitoring quality control across platforms
• Create summaries of the documents, case arguments and organize data by topic

While these agents will still require human oversight, they represent a dramatic leap in efficiency and scalability.

Another exciting frontier is Multimodal Discovery which is the ability to connect and contextualize data across formats and cross channel communications. For example, searching for a keyword or concept could simultaneously pull in emails, Slack messages, call transcripts, and IoT data from wearables. This “search one, find all” approach has the potential to uncover layers of meaning and interconnectivity that were previously invisible.

Intent, Sentiment, and the Challenge of Ephemeral Data

Modern communications are rife with nuance like emojis, memes, GIFs, and slang interspersed throughout all textual conversations. Interpreting these requires more than a keyword search; it demands contextual intelligence. D’Amico described the importance of eDiscovering intent which is the ability of AI to read between the lines and identify tone, sentiment, or potential misconduct embedded in these short-form, symbolic messages.

Wearable technologies and IoT devices also present emerging data sources that, when analyzed correctly, can provide additional context around behavior, location, and anomalies tied to key events.

Adoption Trends and Practical Guidance

Citing the ILTA 2024 eDiscovery Survey, Seiveno noted that:

• 76% of large law firms and 46% of midsize firms are already using AI in some form for their practice
• Adoption varies across roles: 40% legal support, 22% attorneys, 63% paralegals

Legal professionals are at varying stages of their AI journey. “Just get started somewhere,” Seiveno advised. “Even small steps create momentum.”

He offered three core recommendations:

1. Engage Clients – Create a one-page explainer to secure informed consent and highlight AI’s value.
2. Offer Training – Ensure both legal and support teams are informed on emerging tools and workflows.
3. Oversee Workflows – AI needs human oversight. Establish governance to validate outcomes and improve models.

Ethics and Compliance: Start with Policy

As AI becomes more embedded in legal practice, ethical boundaries and regulatory obligations must remain top of mind. The panel referenced several key sources:

• ABA Opinion 512 – Emphasizes duty to disclose the use of AI
• FRCP 11 – Requires “reasonable inquiry” in representations made to the court
• FRCP 37 – Addresses consequences for failing to disclose methods used
• In re Google Play Store Antitrust – A recent case highlighting the significance of transparency in AI use

Building policy starts with assessing existing tools, incorporating ABA guidance, promoting firm-wide enterprise AI solutions, and ensuring client data is kept fully siloed from other matters.

Final Thoughts

AI in eDiscovery is evolving from a helpful tool into a strategic advantage. But with this evolution comes the responsibility to educate, govern, and ethically apply these innovations. As D’Amico put it, “AI can surface things people wouldn’t even think to look for.” And that’s the key: not replacing human judgment, but enhancing it.

Whether you’re new to AI or already using it daily, one thing is clear: the future of discovery isn’t just data-driven—it’s AI-enabled, ethically informed, and client-focused.

Insights from The Masters Conference Chicago – May 20th, 2025

In a dynamic and data-driven legal environment, the once-separate domains of eDiscovery, privacy, cybersecurity, records management, and AI legal advisory are converging into a single, multifaceted discipline: Data Law. At The Masters Conference in Chicago, a diverse legal professional panel explored how law firms and corporations can adapt by building integrated teams and workflows that reflect this evolution.

Panelists:

• Jay Carle – Seyfarth Shaw
• Jason Priebe – Seyfarth Shaw
• Natalya Northrip – Medallia
• Amanda Metts – Baxter
• Paul Noonan – United Airlines
• Jenny Hamilton – Exterro

The End of the Siloed Approach

Jay Carle (Seyfarth Shaw) opened the discussion by noting that traditional silos are breaking down. “These disciplines are starting to overlap more and more. The siloed approach doesn’t work when it comes to managing risk. Everything needs to be interconnected.” This theme resonated throughout the session, with each panelist emphasizing how integration enhances control, efficiency, and legal defensibility.

Cross-Functional Collaboration in Action

Paul Noonan (United Airlines) illustrated how information governance and eDiscovery are aligning more closely, particularly in understanding and managing the corporate data footprint. Noonan mentioned that they have a suite of approved applications for oversight, but there are always rogue apps like WhatsApp. That’s where internal education and policy enforcement become critical.

Amanda Metts (Baxter) highlighted the necessity of clear, enforced preservation and collection policies within legal departments, and noted that being in legal, preservation is inevitable so policies must be enforceable and aligned across departments.

Jenny Hamilton (Exterro) provided a unique perspective from both the legal and tech sides, explaining that while a law firm might benefit from separate departments, corporations need cross-departmental alignment. Hamilton said that litigation and IT need to work hand-in-hand. Identify the greatest risks, but also accept that some risk is inevitable.

AI, Privacy, and Cybersecurity – Managing the Convergence

Jason Priebe (Seyfarth Shaw) noted the growing complexity with generative AI (GAI). He said that some clients are exploring GAI models cautiously, while others are saying no entirely. Regardless, there must be centralized command and control over which apps are used, how data is retained and secured, and how discovery protocols are enforced, especially when working with opposing counsel.

He stressed the importance of having clear protective order templates and requiring outside parties to adhere to the same security standards when handling data.

Natalya Northrip (Medallia) reinforced that even if GAI policies are in flux, organizations should have internal panels that shape them across departments, ensuring responsible innovation.

Building Governance That Works

The conversation turned practical when the audience asked how to effectively enforce policies. Noonan suggested publishing policies company-wide and performing regular audits. He emphasized that litigation is also a great check and that employees subject to legal holds are more aware of the policies. Carle added that repetition is key: Constant messaging keeps data policies top of mind.

Priebe recommended leveraging technology solutions that analyze data throughout an enterprise to support classification and governance across various data law functions.

On change management, Noonan emphasized structured rollouts and company-wide communication. He said that they already have change management processes in place to ensure employees understand and follow new policies.

The Takeaway: Integration is the Future of Data Law

All panelists agreed: modern legal matters require a holistic, integrated approach to data. Whether it’s a litigation hold, responding to a regulatory inquiry, or deploying new AI tools, legal teams need to understand how privacy, cybersecurity, records, and discovery intersect, and be prepared to respond cohesively.

For both law firms and corporate legal departments, the challenge is to build multidisciplinary teams, foster internal alignment, and ensure everyone from technologists to litigators knows how to navigate today’s overlapping data risks.

As Carle aptly concluded, that at the very least, attorneys need to know who to call internally. That kind of awareness is the minimum standard in today’s legal landscape.

Masters Conference Chicago | May 20, 2025
Hosted by Seyfarth Shaw LLP | Presented by Infinnium

As the legal landscape continues to involve many new communication data as evidence, the conversation around data governance and eDiscovery is becoming more urgent and more strategic. At the 2025 Masters Conference in Chicago, a dynamic panel featuring Doug Kaminski, Chief Revenue Officer of Infinnium, and David Cohen, Senior Counsel at Reed Smith LLP, offered a powerful call to action: The data revolution is not coming; it’s already here.

A Moment of Reckoning for Legal Tech

“This is a pivotal moment in the legal profession,” Kaminski opened, “and shiny GenAI tools alone won’t cut it. Real transformation demands a shift in how we manage and make sense of our ever-expanding data universe.”

Kaminski and Cohen explored the imminent overhaul of the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) in what’s being dubbed “EDRM 2.0” and aims to integrate with the Information Governance Reference Model (IGRM) and address the increasingly blurred lines between governance, discovery, and compliance.

Cohen noted, “It’s time to revise the EDRM because what we do today often begins with filtering and analysis before collection. The traditional model doesn’t reflect that. Analysis is now happening at the very beginning of the process as well as most every step along the way.”

The Push Toward the Source

In today’s data-rich environment, organizations can no longer afford to “lift and shift” massive datasets across siloed systems. Kaminski emphasized the growing importance of conducting analysis at the data source: “You get to the answers you want sooner, without error-prone handoffs or multiple data copies. Review is then on richer, more relevant content.”

This upstream approach: Identify, Preserve, Process, and Analyze in-place is gaining traction thanks to advanced connectors and automation tools. Kaminski highlighted Infinnium’s suite of over 50 data connectors as an example of how technology is enabling pre-collection analytics, sentiment analysis, and early identification of sensitive content, all while minimizing disruption.

The Expanding Data Universe

Both speakers stressed the massive growth in enterprise data types. “It’s not just documents and emails anymore,” Cohen explained. “It’s corporate communications, chat platforms, and other ephemeral sources. Email itself is still growing as a communication standard.”

Complicating matters are rising privacy regulations and increasing volume-related costs, especially from cloud platforms like Microsoft 365. These pressures are fueling a renewed interest in data minimization which is a principle that’s becoming essential for legal teams managing both compliance risk and cost.

“Legal operations are getting more involved,” Kaminski said, “and they’re finding that minimizing data proactively is not just best practice, it’s a necessity.” He warned that if data isn’t proactively remediated before a litigation event, it will inevitably become part of discovery, leading to exponential costs and risks.

Defensibility in the GenAI Era

While there’s growing excitement around Generative AI, adoption in legal workflows remains cautious. “There’s still fear around hallucinations and reliability,” Cohen acknowledged. “But ESI protocols remain the best safeguard for determining how GenAI and human review can complement each other.”

Importantly, Cohen emphasized that organizations need to actively manage their data environments and not just to comply with laws like the GDPR or CCPA, but also to defend against evolving threats, including weaponized DSARs (Data Subject Access Requests) and cyber breaches.

Action Steps for Legal Teams

So what can organizations do today?

• Challenge legacy thinking. Reevaluate traditional workflows and consider how modern tools can shift functions leftward in the EDRM.
• Embrace practical data minimization. Reducing data footprints helps control costs and limit exposure.
• Think holistically. Understand the entire data universe from creation to retention to remediation.
• Leverage AI responsibly. Use it where it helps most, but always under robust review protocols.
• Find a sherpa. As Kaminski noted, “You don’t have to do it alone, but you do have to start.”

Conclusion

The key takeaway? The legal world must stop reacting to data and start governing it actively, strategically, and in place. The convergence of compliance, technology, and litigation readiness is creating both pressure and possibility. For those willing to rethink their processes and embrace modern tools, the data revolution isn’t a burden it’s a competitive edge.

www.Infinnium.com
Know your Data. Govern your Data. In Place.