Close
Enter your
text here

Information Governance

Ralph Losey of Jackson Lewis, LLP: eDiscovery Trends

This is the seventh of the 2015 LegalTech New York (LTNY) Thought Leader Interview series. eDiscovery Daily interviewed several thought leaders at LTNY this year and generally asked each of them the following questions:

  1. What are your general observations about LTNY this year and how it fits into emerging trends? Do you think American Lawyer Media (ALM) should consider moving LTNY to a different time of year to minimize travel disruptions due to weather?
  2. After our discussion last year regarding the new amendments to discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, additional changes were made to Rule 37(e). Do you see those changes as being positive and do you see the new amendments passing through Congress this year?
  3. Last year, most thought leaders agreed that, despite numerous resources in the industry, most attorneys still don’t know a lot about eDiscovery. Do you think anything has been done in the past year to improve the situation?
  4. What are you working on that you’d like our readers to know about?

Today’s thought leader is Ralph Losey. Ralph is an attorney in private practice with the law firm of Jackson Lewis, LLP, where he is a Shareholder and the firm’s National e-Discovery Counsel. Ralph is also a prolific author of eDiscovery books and articles, the principal author and publisher of the popular e-Discovery Team® Blog, founder and owner of an online training program, e-Discovery Team Training, with attorney and technical students all over the world, founder of the new Electronic Discovery Best Practices (EDBP) lawyer-centric work flow model. Ralph is also the publisher of LegalSearchScience.com and PreSuit.com on predictive coding methods and applications.

What are your general observations about LTNY this year and how it fits into emerging trends? Do you think American Lawyer Media (ALM) should consider moving LTNY to a different time of year to minimize travel disruptions due to weather?

It seems to me that attendance is up. I got here a little late, but I was only delayed two hours – I know that some were delayed as much as two days. Despite that, I think it was a good turnout. When I was walking the floor, there seemed to be crowds of people, so I think it was pretty well attended this year.

The programming this year had a slightly different orientation. I had a presentation on predictive coding (which I’ve presented on predictive coding topics for the last four years or so) and, in past years, it seemed that my presentation would be one of a dozen or more at the show whereas this year, it seemed like there were only three or four presentations on predictive coding. So, maybe the “fad” part of predictive coding is over and more people are into the topic in depth. The presentation that we gave was more on an advanced level – we didn’t discuss whether or not you should use it or review the basics; instead, we went into a deeper level. And that was fun for me to do.

Instead, I think the hot item this year was information governance, which is somewhat of a general “catch-all”. Then, the other two things that I saw in the presentations and in the “buzz” on the floor when talking to people were two things that I’m very concerned about as well: security (cybersecurity is the word I prefer to use) and privacy. I think those are two long-term issues that have been brewing and are now coming to the forefront where lawyers are realizing that these are important issues that are coming out of technology.

As for whether they should consider moving the show, well, I’m from Florida and I love to see snow every now and then – it’s a real rarity where I live. I left a 72 degree paradise to arrive here and it was 18 degrees. In spite of that, I think the show should remain in New York at this time of year and I fully believe that this is the event of the year. If anything, I think it’s growing in importance. For me, the older I get, the more I try to limit my travel and appearances and this would be one that I would not take off my list of must attend events, if for no other reason than because everyone is here. I love walking around and running into judges and old friends, so that is one of the reasons that I think it is the premier event of the year.

After our discussion last year regarding the new amendments to discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, additional changes were made to Rule 37(e). Do you see those changes as being positive and do you see the new amendments passing through Congress this year?

I don’t think there will be any issues passing the rules amendments through Congress, I think they will sail through and be part of our rules soon enough. I don’t really feel that the rules changes will make that much difference. I just recently litigated the existing Rule 37(e) and in my memos, I quoted the new Rule 37(e). At the end of the day, it didn’t really make any difference in the court’s adjudication whether it was the old rule or the new rule. So, I still continue to think that the changes are a positive move, but I don’t think they will be a savior or “cure-all” that people might hope. In that sense, I may be a little pessimistic about it. I’ve seen rules changes before, such as ’06.

This leads to a slightly different topic, but I ultimately feel that all these (as I call them) cosmetic rules changes will fail. I think that, in maybe ten years, there is going to be a major overhaul. I think the rules committee and the federal judges will realize that you can’t just do these periodic slight “tweak” of the rules. I think they will eventually consider and, possibly enact, a complete overhaul or our rules and procedures – focused on discovery. I don’t think discovery is working and I don’t think the discovery rules are really working and I don’t think that they can be patched up. They’ve been trying to patch up discovery for 35 years now with various rules changes and they’ve never worked. I have no reason to believe that 2015 will be any different than 1989 or before that. I think that they’re going to be forced to take drastic measures. That’s my prediction – we’ll see.

Last year, most thought leaders agreed that, despite numerous resources in the industry, most attorneys still don’t know a lot about eDiscovery. Do you think anything has been done in the past year to improve the situation?

In my world (which is a fairly large world, but it’s all in employment law), I see employment law cases all over the country of an asymmetric type: small plaintiff against the big corporation. The change that I see is mainly on the corporation defendant level – they are getting their acts together much better on the preservation front. In fact, all across the whole spectrum, the corporations are slowly but surely getting there. There is still a long way to go, but I do see improvement. I see improvement in the defense bar in general and, of course, with my own attorneys, which for five years I have put through intensive training. We have 800 lawyers and I would say that 600 of them are litigators, so, after five years, there are certain things that have penetrated and they have developed a core level of competence, particularly on preservation. Preservation is in every case, so that’s the most important thing to get down pat and I have seen definite improvement in that.

Now, on the plaintiff side, it’s still amazingly slow. The plaintiffs’ bar is slow to catch up, they are still untrained and, for the most part, unknowledgeable. And, some of the ones that are active in eDiscovery are using it as a tool to be a “pain in the ass” really. They’re not doing it for true discovery; instead, they’re doing it more as a harassment tactic. And, they don’t really know what they’re doing. So, we have to deal with that. On the other hand, we are seeing more and more sincere plaintiff’s counsel too, so it’s not all bad. Just not as many as we would like, since cooperation really is the best way to go.

But, we are also seeing situations where we’re making requests and wanting to see the Facebook pages and wanting to see the plaintiff’s email. Although it is still asymmetric, there essentially isn’t a plaintiff in the world that doesn’t have an email account. We still need discovery from them. The impact is what I call the “boomerang effect” – be careful what you throw out there, it can come back right at you. When the tables are turned and we ask the plaintiff’s counsel “what are you doing about preservation”, we get big blank stares. In a way, the fact that the plaintiffs have their own ESI has leveled the playing field a bit.

What are you working on that you’d like our readers to know about?

I’d like the readers to check out what I’m working on to create a best practices and standards for the legal practice of electronic discovery, and I call that Electronic Discovery Best Practices (EDBP). It’s not EDRM, it’s about what lawyers do. That’s what I’ve been doing for the past eight years, helping lawyers do electronic discovery. That continues to evolve.

The thing that’s new that I’ve been working on is cybersecurity. So, one of my websites is eDiscoverySecurity.com where I talk about the need for lawyers and companies when they’re doing eDiscovery to be concerned about keeping it secure. We’re often assembling very sensitive documents, which are a target for hackers, including foreign governments. The Chinese are famous for this and law firms are being hacked. The final thing that I would point out is that I’ve got HackerLaw.org, which is another new web site that I’ve created associated with my interest in cybersecurity. I consider myself a “hacker” in the positive sense of someone who is hands on, working with computers – that’s what “hacker” really means. But, there’s also the “dark hat” hackers that are my enemies and there’s a whole war going on out there. This site pertains to that and also talks about the positive side of being a hacker (for example, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak were proud to call themselves “hackers”). Believe it or not, the term “hacker” started out in model railroading – the famous computer lab at MIT grew out of the model railroad club at MIT. They were hands on building railroad tracks and, out of that grew the whole computer culture – little known historical point.

As for the e-Discovery Team® Blog, the three part series that I just finished on ei-Recall was the hardest blog post series that I have ever written. I put a lot of time into it as a public service because I worried about what is the best way to confirm and verify your results when you’re doing a review. I call it “Quality Assurance” and there are so many ways to do it that I came up with this approach for recall and consulted a number of scientists during the process. I didn’t do it because I’m trying to sell anything. But, I hope it will become the de-facto standard and I wrote it, at length, so that anybody with a little study can do it on their own. People have started to tell me that they have studied the blog and are starting to do it, so that’s encouraging. The whole point of “I’ve attained 80% recall” – that’s wrong, you can never know exact recall, it has to be a range. I’ve had some scientists after the fact tell me that’s what they’ve been doing all along, they just didn’t call it “ei-Recall”. You only calculate it at the end of a project, but that’s when you need to do it. So, I think it has been one of my major accomplishments and I hope everyone will check it out.

Thanks, Ralph, for participating in the interview!

And to the readers, as always, please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic!

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscoveryDaily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

George Socha of Socha Consulting LLC: eDiscovery Trends

This is the sixth of the 2015 LegalTech New York (LTNY) Thought Leader Interview series. eDiscovery Daily interviewed several thought leaders at LTNY this year and generally asked each of them most of the following questions:

  1. What are your general observations about LTNY this year and how it fits into emerging trends? Do you think American Lawyer Media (ALM) should consider moving LTNY to a different time of year to minimize travel disruptions due to weather?
  2. Two or three years ago, the “next big thing” was probably technology assisted review; last year, it was probably information governance. What would you say this year’s “next big thing” is, or do you think we have one this year?
  3. Last year, most thought leaders agreed that, despite numerous resources in the industry, most attorneys still don’t know a lot about eDiscovery. Do you think anything has been done in the past year to improve the situation?
  4. What are you working on that you’d like our readers to know about?

Today’s thought leader is George Socha. A litigator for 16 years, George is President of Socha Consulting LLC, offering services as an electronic discovery expert witness, special master and advisor to corporations, law firms and their clients, and legal vertical market software and service providers in the areas of electronic discovery and automated litigation support. George has also been co-author of the leading survey on the electronic discovery market, The Socha-Gelbmann Electronic Discovery Survey; in 2011, he and Tom Gelbmann converted the Survey into Apersee, an online system for selecting eDiscovery providers and their offerings. In 2005, he and Tom Gelbmann launched the Electronic Discovery Reference Model project to establish standards within the eDiscovery industry – today, the EDRM model has become a standard in the industry for the eDiscovery life cycle and there are nine active projects with over 300 members from 81 participating organizations. George has a J.D. for Cornell Law School and a B.A. from the University of Wisconsin – Madison.

What are your general observations about LTNY this year and how it fits into emerging trends? Do you think American Lawyer Media (ALM) should consider moving LTNY to a different time of year to minimize travel disruptions due to weather?

{Interviewed the first morning of LTNY, so the focus of the question to George was more about his observations about the curriculum for the show and what to expect}.

It is a little early for general observations about LTNY – we haven’t even heard the opening keynote panel discussion – but here goes. Looking at the curriculum and talking with attendees, speakers and exhibitors, it appears we have reached a stage where a significant number of eDiscovery providers are turning their attention from the “traditional” eDiscovery market and are looking, instead, for new markets. First it was information governance, now the “flavor of the month” appears to be security. Some providers are, I suspect, looking for a larger pond, on with more for them to eat; others may feel that the eDiscovery pond is getting too crowded or, perhaps, beginning to dry out.

At the same time, a large portion of the legal industry continues to be ignored by the bulk of eDiscovery providers. Many providers deem most law firms to be too small to pursue. After all, which law firm do you think a provider is more likely to try to get work from, one with 5 lawyers, or one with 500? And with roughly 80% of the 57,000 or so law firms in the US having 5 lawyers or less, that leaves a lot of law firms who aren’t getting a lot of eDiscovery love. I suspect we will see this reflected in the content delivered at the educations session and in the focus of software and services on display in the exhibit hall.

As for whether ALM should consider moving LTNY to a different time of year to minimize travel disruptions due to weather… For me, one of the draws of LTNY is that I get to go somewhere warm in the beginning of February. But then, I live in Minnesota. I think LTNY has a lock on the place and time. Software providers plan major releases and updates with LTNY in mind. Providers of all stripes schedule their biggest announcements for the weeks before LTNY takes place. Consumers shopping for new providers and providers seeking new customers set up meetings for the entire week of LTNY, not just at the Hilton but at surrounding hotels as well. So, some other place, some other time, just because of the weather? I don’t think so.

Two or three years ago, the “next big thing” was probably technology assisted review; last year, it was probably information governance. What would you say this year’s “next big thing” is, or do you think we have one this year?

If I were to be glib, I would say that this year’s “next big thing” will be just one more “bright shiny object.” But that would not really be fair. We have had a “next big thing” happening for several years now. But it has not been TAR, or information governance, or ECA, or any of those. Rather, it has been the many incremental improvements made in the tools available to us, the processes we use, and the sophistication of the people using those tools to carry out those processes. While we are a long way from a mature industry and a mature market, nonetheless we have made huge advances.

Last year, most thought leaders agreed that, despite numerous resources in the industry, most attorneys still don’t know a lot about eDiscovery. Do you think anything has been done in the past year to improve the situation?

I agree with the assessment that most attorneys still don’t know a lot about eDiscovery. We have a long way to go. We make incremental improvements, but I off the top of my head I can’t think about any major advances in the past year.

What are you working on that you’d like our readers to know about?

We’ve been making a number of changes and advancements with EDRM over the past year, especially the past few months. Look to see much more in terms of efforts to focus on standards and on practical tools and capabilities. Also, look to see much more from us in terms of collaborative activities, such as the recent partnering announcements with ACEDS as an Affinity partner and eDiscovery Daily as an Education partner. We’ve broadened our base of membership in terms of types of members considerably over the last year – we have a much larger number of corporate members than ever in the past and, for the first time, we have governmental members. I think that change in membership and the continued push toward the practical will lead to further positive changes with EDRM.

Here are links to some of EDRM’s other most recent announcements, including an updated statistical sampling guide, clarification to its Model Code of Conduct and release of the EDRM eDiscovery Maturity Self-Assessment Test (eMSAT-1).

Thanks, George, for participating in the interview!

And to the readers, as always, please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic!

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscoveryDaily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Jason R. Baron of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP: eDiscovery Trends

This is the fifth of the 2015 LegalTech New York (LTNY) Thought Leader Interview series. eDiscovery Daily interviewed several thought leaders at LTNY this year and generally asked each of them the following questions:

  1. What are your general observations about LTNY this year and how it fits into emerging trends? Do you think American Lawyer Media (ALM) should consider moving LTNY to a different time of year to minimize travel disruptions due to weather?
  2. After our discussion last year regarding the new amendments to discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, additional changes were made to Rule 37(e). Do you see those changes as being positive and do you see the new amendments passing through Congress this year?
  3. What are you working on that you’d like our readers to know about?

Today’s thought leader is Jason R. Baron. An internationally recognized speaker and author on the preservation of electronic documents, Jason is a member of Drinker Biddle’s Information Governance and eDiscovery practice and also a member of the leadership team for the Information Governance Initiative. Jason previously served as Director of Litigation for the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and as trial lawyer and senior counsel at the Department of Justice. He was a founding co-coordinator of the National Institute of Standards and Technology TREC Legal Track, a multi-year international information retrieval project devoted to evaluating search issues in a legal context. He also founded the international DESI (Discovery of Electronically Stored Information) workshop series, bringing together lawyers and academics to discuss cutting-edge issues in eDiscovery.

What are your general observations about LTNY this year and how it fits into emerging trends? Do you think American Lawyer Media (ALM) should consider moving LTNY to a different time of year to minimize travel disruptions due to weather?

Well, it’s not going to come as a big surprise to you that I have seen more sessions related to information governance. Those of us who are part of the movement here may see IG under every rock, but I did make a humorous aside at a panel that I participated in on the first day of LegalTech: “Welcome to the 29th session on Information Governance.” It seems to me that we have gone through a hype curve that Gartner talks about with both technology assisted review and with big data, and I think we are definitely going up that same curve on information governance. Whether that will level off at some point, I don’t know. But, I did see it as a more major element of this year’s conference. And, it’s not just that there was a dedicated track to the topic of IG here at LegalTech, but an increased focus on talking about IG issues across several tracks and in new and different ways.

Of course, as we came upon the year 2015, we are now living in a post-Sony, post-Snowden world. If you had to do a Time magazine cover, it might be called the year of the data breach. In my mind the increased focus on cybersecurity issues is a leveraging opportunity for those of us in the information governance community, given that it’s a moment where the C-Suite in corporations is thinking about data breaches all around the enterprise, and also going beyond that to think about their data. Because it’s one thing to secure the borders – I draw a little square when I diagram this out – and to ensure constant vigilance. But it’s another thing to figure out what’s inside the borders that you’re securing. And that’s where the information governance proposition shows up.

So, while the C-Suite is focused on cybersecurity threats, they should also be having a conversation about the amount of data they’re accumulating, the legacy data that they have, how are they getting visualization into the data they have, how are they maximizing the opportunities in terms of ROI on the data that’s being collected on the consumer side, and figuring out what’s of high value and what’s of low value. This is something that the records profession has attempted to do for decades, but we’re in a new world of big data and we need to apply 21st century thinking to this. So, what I see here at the conference is an increased attention on IG and an increased attention on cybersecurity generally and I think that those are “twins” – they go together conceptually.

The world is accelerating in terms of the pace of change of technology and if lawyers aren’t competent in understanding new technologies that they can utilize in their practices across the board – not just in eDiscovery but as a general practice – then they are going to lose out to others in the Darwinian sense. So, I don’t think LegalTech has ever been more important than right now. I think we need to expand our horizon beyond eDiscovery collection, preservation and production to the greater world of analytics and other new things that are happening in the business space. And aside from analytics and IG itself, it would be interesting for LegalTech to talk about artificial intelligence and deep learning and about how robots and software may eventually be replacing lawyers in terms of legal research. It has been very much an eDiscovery-centric conference for a long time, but that’s not everything that’s encompassed in the world of legal practice. So, it would be great to see LegalTech expand beyond its current focus.

As for the possibility of moving LTNY to a different time of year, what could be better than snow storms, slush and ice in New York City in February? Of course, if you’re asking me if I’d like to see it in Hawaii instead, the answer is yes. 🙂

After our discussion last year regarding the new amendments to discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, additional changes were made to Rule 37(e). Do you see those changes as being positive and do you see the new amendments passing through Congress this year?

No question about it – there is no known Congressional opposition to the rules and we all expect them to be effectuated. Some close colleagues of mine have made the point that Rule 37 particularly will enormously help large defendants in being able to push back on the trend towards over-preservation of data caught up in litigation. If this holds true, the rules will support an important pillar of practicing good information governance, namely, finding ways in which corporations can continue to dispose of information without running n the risk of spoliation claims in litigation.

I have not a contrary view, but let’s just call it a “view from the mountaintop.” I wrote a letter on behalf of the Information Governance Initiative which is on our web site. It was an open letter to the Federal Rules Committee that was looking at the thousands of comments that came in regarding the proposed rules changes. Basically, the IGI’s position is that the changes to Rule 37 and Rule 26 may be welcome; however, what we believe in even more strongly is that real changes will come with technology and with cultural change. We’re all advocates, at least at the IGI and in my own legal practice at Drinker Biddle, in seeking more optimal ways to automate processes and the overall workflow, to essentially reduce the burden on individuals at all points in the eDiscovery process and in the greater IG space.

We’re also advocates in support of Rule 1, which now more clearly emphasizes cooperation in discovery (via the Notes section of the proposed rule which states “Effective advocacy is consistent with – and indeed depends upon – cooperative and proportional use of procedure.”). I have been very proud to be associated with The Sedona Conference® and the Cooperation Proclamation that it issued. The late Richard Braman spearheaded this movement – as discussed in Joe Looby’s film The Decade of Discovery. Lawyers know that The Sedona Conference has been advocating for lawyers and judges to sign on to a different practice culture, at least at the Meet and Confer stage of litigation, where there is more transparency and more open discussion among lawyers in trying to narrow issues that opposing sides feel strongly about. The ideal result is that the very narrowest set of issues is presented to a judge going forward. I think the culture of cooperation is taking hold. It is not “Pollyanna-ish” to think that, in every district in the country, there will be one or more judges who are aggressively pushing lawyers to be more open and cooperative earlier in the process.

The technology in the eDiscovery space is getting to a level of complexity that you simply have to have a conversation with opposing counsel about preservation issues and about search and access issues early on in the game. We just all need to “raise our games” in terms of being competent to talk about tools to make the eDiscovery process more efficient. I am one who holds the view that enormous resources being continuously devoted to tinkering with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure misses the larger picture here, which is that the pace of change of technology is so great, that no Rules can ever catch up, as such. As lawyers, we need to give our best advice to clients on how to improve their processes to lower costs. And of course, many remain hopeful that there will be less of a “dagger over the heads” of large entities in litigation with the rules changes going into effect.

What are you working on that you’d like our readers to know about?

Glad you asked, Doug! It has been quite a ride for the past 15 months working in the private sector after 34 years in the government, including at the Justice Department, and being Director of Litigation at the National Archives. The problems faced in the public sector are profound, with respect to information governance challenges, both from a security perspective and well as with respect to record keeping, open government and open access in the digital age. But I now see many of the same issues here that the private sector faces as well. We all live in a world of litigation of increasing complexity. How you get your arms around the need to preserve some of your high value data, while segregating other portions of your data including legacy data that is to be considered low value, is a profound IG issue. I am very fortunate to now be part of a practice group at Drinker Biddle that is talking about all of these important information governance issues, in ways that we hope will be attractive to clients.

I’ve also been having a great time in working with Barclay Blair, Bennett Borden and Jay Brudz as part of the Information Governance Initiative, which is a new think tank and consortium launched a year ago at Legaltech (in 2014). We now have a whole a large number of sponsors and lots of activities continuously going on, including boot camps, dinners, benchmark studies, white papers, and a conference in Chicago in May about Chief Information Governance officers (a new position in the IG space).

I have also had the pleasure of going around the US and the world to be part of screenings of a film by Joe Looby calledThe Decade of Discovery (covered by this blog here, here and here; click here for the latest listing of film screening locations and dates), which traces the evolution of search in eDiscovery since around the year 2000. Joe has done a wonderful job of capturing in a 60 minute documentary the issues we all have been facing. In particular, the film is a tribute to the late Richard Braman and his vision for dialogue and cooperation in discovery. The movie also talks about what I had the privilege of doing, in terms of being tasked to search for White House email, and the film also involves a number of prominent judges and lawyers. So, for the next few months, I’ll continue our world tour with screenings of the film in law schools and other venues talking about these issues.

It’s very important to me to get a message out to younger lawyers and law students in particular that this field of eDiscovery and information governance is growing, it’s a hot field, an interesting field and one where you can be what we call a “SME” — a subject matter expert – in a pretty short amount of time. So, for anyone reading this, the message is “get on board”, become an expert in some niche in this space and in a relatively still chilly market for lawyers, you can distinguish yourself. I would be happy to have that conversation with anyone who is interested in being part of the dialogue about eDiscovery and information governance.

Thanks, Jason, for participating in the interview!

And to the readers, as always, please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic!

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscoveryDaily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Tom O’Connor of Advanced Discovery: eDiscovery Trends

This is the fourth of the 2015 LegalTech New York (LTNY) Thought Leader Interview series. eDiscovery Daily interviewed several thought leaders at LTNY this year and generally asked each of them the following questions:

  1. What are your general observations about LTNY this year and how it fits into emerging trends? Do you think American Lawyer Media (ALM) should consider moving LTNY to a different time of year to minimize travel disruptions due to weather?
  2. After our discussion last year regarding the new amendments to discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, additional changes were made to Rule 37(e). Do you see those changes as being positive and do you see the new amendments passing through Congress this year?
  3. Last year, most thought leaders agreed that, despite numerous resources in the industry, most attorneys still don’t know a lot about eDiscovery. Do you think anything has been done in the past year to improve the situation?
  4. What are you working on that you’d like our readers to know about?

Today’s thought leader is Tom O’Connor. Tom is a nationally known consultant, speaker and writer in the area of computerized litigation support systems. A frequent lecturer on the subject of legal technology, Tom has been on the faculty of numerous national CLE providers and has taught college level courses on legal technology. Tom’s involvement with large cases led him to become familiar with dozens of various software applications for litigation support and he has both designed databases and trained legal staffs in their use on many of the cases mentioned above. This work has involved both public and private law firms of all sizes across the nation. Tom is the Director of the Gulf Coast Legal Technology Center in New Orleans and he just joined Advanced Discovery as a Senior ESI Consultant in January.

What are your general observations about LTNY this year and how it fits into emerging trends? Do you think American Lawyer Media (ALM) should consider moving LTNY to a different time of year to minimize travel disruptions due to weather?

Like all LegalTech shows, it’s hectic. I come to New York thinking, “hey, I’m going to go have a good dinner one night, maybe go down to Times Square” and by 8pm, I’m exhausted. You talk to people all day and at the end of the show day there’s a group of people who want to go out to parties and I’m going across the street to the 24 hour deli and getting a sandwich. It’s always busy and there’s always a ton of things going on at the show. It is great, though, that I get people that I don’t get to see on a regular basis, like Michael Arkfeld and George Socha, so this show is really priceless for me to get to talk to them. Craig (Ball) and George and I just had lunch and talked about Continuous Active Learning and those are the sorts of discussions that LTNY facilitates.

Last night, when I was grabbing my sandwich at the end of the day, Henry Dicker (Executive Director of LegalTech) came walking in and we had a great talk about LegalTech and their worldwide schedule. Henry and I have been doing these shows for about the same amount of time. So, it was interesting getting his perspective in a quiet moment about how the show is going and the attendance and so forth. ALM has apparently been having great success with their overseas shows. I think Henry said that, at the end of the year, he was in Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong and mainland China – all within five weeks. So, they have been having great success internationally.

As for the show itself, if you’re looking for new product information and what the latest and greatest is across a wide swath of product types (i.e., every type of legal software imaginable), LTNY, because it is in late January/early February has always been the “granddaddy of them all”. Vendors like to get new releases out for the show, make announcements, etc. ILTA is probably the better show for highly technical information and IT types because it’s where they start opening the hood and popping the carburetor off and boring out the engine. That being said, Henry has a great relationship with ILTA and they have an ILTA track here. But, for what LTNY does, which is cut across all products, it’s unbeatable.

The one issue I have with LTNY (which is not really a negative because the slack is picked up by the ABA Tech Show) is the over-emphasis on BIG firm solutions. BIG firms, BIG corporations, BIG data – everything’s BIG. But, the ABA Tech Show does a good job in picking up and emphasizing small to mid-sized firms and solutions for them.

As for trends for this year, every year there’s a buzzword or two that interests people. The one that I think is particularly discussed a lot this year (again, by big firms) is cybersecurity. After last year, with the big security breaches at Sony and Home Depot, I think that’s in the forefront of people’s discussions right now. I think that’s a very hot topic. Information Governance continues to be a hot topic as well – Patrick Burke had a great program on Monday at the Cardozo Law School – so, I think that continues to be (if you’ll pardon the pun) a huge interest for attendees here. The third area of interest that I’m hearing a lot about is analytics – how to use computer tools of all sorts before you get to review and, in some cases, before you even get to the processing stage and pare down that huge amount of data. Using those tools to try to reduce that volume and get a handle on what’s relevant. A few years ago, the hot topic was early case assessment. It’s a continuation of that trend, but with much more sophisticated tools and ability to do it.

As for moving LTNY to a different time of year, yes, I’ve been advocating for years that they consider flipping LegalTech West and LegalTech East. Have LegalTech West at this time of year and go to San Francisco (where the show will be held this year) or Los Angeles (where the show has been held in past years) during the wintertime and New York in the late spring or early summer. I understand there are long term contracts and it would take a while, but it sure would help things with the weather and travel issues. Once you delay a flight for bad weather by half an hour or 45 minutes, everything goes “to hell in a hand basket” quickly. So, yes, I would love to see it moved.

After our discussion last year regarding the new amendments to discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, additional changes were made to Rule 37(e). Do you see those changes as being positive and do you see the new amendments passing through Congress this year?

I don’t think the changes were necessarily for the better. The revised Rule 37(e) still benefits corporate defendants, lowering their burden and making it easier for them to not preserve data. Again, I think that only affects a small percentage of litigants. To paraphrase Judge (Shira) Scheindlin, she essentially said that she just doesn’t think it will have an “in the trenches” sort of an impact. It may in one or two cases, but she didn’t see it as being all that big a deal with the amount of cases that they see, at least in her court. Certainly where I live, in New Orleans and throughout the southeast, the people who I work with in more rural or semi-rural jurisdictions with smaller cases and smaller case loads, there is no impact.

Last year, most thought leaders agreed that, despite numerous resources in the industry, most attorneys still don’t know a lot about eDiscovery. Do you think anything has been done in the past year to improve the situation?

Clearly, we’ve advanced. I think there is better understanding by some attorneys, especially corporate counsel, which I think have a much firmer grasp of what’s going on in eDiscovery. Four or five years ago, Michael Arkfeld said probably only 2% of attorneys really got eDiscovery and understood all of the rules. We’ve improved, but, unfortunately, I think we’ve only gone to about 10%. I think there’s still a lot of work to be done. Law schools are still dragging their feet on what they see as some sort of technical training. It’s not in their “wheelhouse”, not in their charter. I think that’s changing and I think you’re going to see a lot more aggressive legal education around these issues in law schools in the next year or so.

I think that you’re seeing the judiciary be very aggressive in demanding competence and, with some of the local rules changes and ethics opinions (such as the recent one in California), requiring some sort of affidavit or certification that you have enough knowledge to make a pleading in this field. I think we will continue to see more of that. It’s great when we see Judge Scheindlin say that or Judge (John) Facciola or Judge (Andrew) Peck or other big names in the field, but I see judges in the federal district courts in places like New Orleans, Mobile and Mississippi also be much more demanding of competence. So, I don’t think it’s isolated to the northeast or the big name judges, it’s something that the judiciary as a whole is pushing. That has probably been the biggest change.

What are you working on that you’d like our readers to know about?

I have a new position – doing what I’ve always been doing, but now for a national company – heading up the consulting services for Advanced Discovery. I’m working with clients on cases, trying to help them find the right tools to answer these problems that we’re talking about in this interview. And, as always, I’m performing a lot of pro bono work for the Louisiana and Mississippi state bars because we have a very high concentration of solo and small firm attorneys “in our neck of the woods”. They are struggling with all sorts of education issues, especially around eDiscovery and technology updates. That’s a major undertaking, from Houston to Pensacola, in states that are poorer and mostly rural. You think about New Orleans or Mobile, but when you get above that I-10 line, you get to an area that’s underserved by the legal community in general and by technology. Courts, attorneys and clients are all struggling with these issues down there.

Thanks, Tom, for participating in the interview!

And to the readers, as always, please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic!

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscoveryDaily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

James D. Zinn, Managing Director of Huron Consulting Group: eDiscovery Trends

This is the second of the 2015 LegalTech New York (LTNY) Thought Leader Interview series. eDiscovery Daily interviewed several thought leaders at LTNY this year and generally asked each of them the following questions:

  1. What are your general observations about LTNY this year and how it fits into emerging trends? Do you think American Lawyer Media (ALM) should consider moving LTNY to a different time of year to minimize travel disruptions due to weather?
  2. After our discussion last year regarding the new amendments to discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, additional changes were made to Rule 37(e). Do you see those changes as being positive and do you see the new amendments passing through Congress this year?
  3. Last year, most thought leaders agreed that, despite numerous resources in the industry, most attorneys still don’t know a lot about eDiscovery. Do you think anything has been done in the past year to improve the situation?
  4. What are you working on that you’d like our readers to know about?

Today’s thought leader is James D. Zinn. James is Managing Director of Huron Consulting Group. James is responsible for leading Huron Legal’s technology vision and strategy globally. He directs the practice’s software engineering, information technology, and product management teams. James is responsible for driving innovation by identifying and incubating emerging technologies and technology-driven solutions with relevance to Huron Legal. He has more than twenty years of experience developing and delivering services and solutions to clients.

{Editor’s Note: Because of travel issues, James did not make it to LTNY this year, but we were able to re-schedule the interview for after the show.}

What are your general observations about LTNY this year and about emerging trends in general for 2015? Do you think American Lawyer Media (ALM) should consider moving LTNY to a different time of year to minimize travel disruptions due to weather?

While I didn’t make it to the show, from what I’ve heard from my colleagues, all of the themes from last year seem to be continuing to mature, including information governance and the convergence of IG and discovery. Also, the focus on security certainly took a step forward this year and the use of predictive coding and other analytical technologies has become a perennial topic and has continued to move forward. So, what I saw was a continued maturing and growth of last year’s themes, which I think will continue throughout 2015.

As for the possibility of moving LTNY to a different time of year, I think that’s a big change. Certainly, New York is much nicer in the fall than in the winter, so I’d love to see a change from that perspective. Realistically, I think that there is a lot of inertia behind the current scheduling, so it would be a big change and disruption to the industry to try and move it.

After our discussion last year regarding the new amendments to discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, additional changes were made to Rule 37(e). Do you see those changes as being positive and do you see the new amendments passing through Congress this year?

I don’t think there will be any roadblocks. I think the proposed changes to the Federal rules are useful and I think we’re already starting to see the impact as our clients have started to act consistent with the proposed changes. So, I don’t really see any challenge with them being adopted and incorporated into current practices; in fact, I think that adoption has already begun.

Some of this could be due to the pending rules changes and some could be due to the maturing of organizations and the industry in general. We have seen the increased use of technology to try to wrestle down the volumes of information. We’re seeing more targeted collection, more targeted use of analytics earlier in the process to reduce data volumes, even before the more traditional review stages begin. We are seeing an increasing number of projects where the data volumes are getting culled much more quickly than they have in the past. The days of collecting large volumes and dumping those large volumes indiscriminately into the discovery process and then sorting it all out are evolving into much more careful efforts. As a result, we see the downstream benefits already starting to appear where there’s less need for brute forcing your way through a corpus of documents.

Last year, most thought leaders agreed that, despite numerous resources in the industry, most attorneys still don’t know a lot about eDiscovery. Do you think anything has been done in the past year to improve the situation?

I think that there has been a continued progress in that area. Our client attorneys that we see on a regular basis are absolutely more knowledgeable about eDiscovery, aware of the issues associated with it and how to address those issues more efficiently. From our view, there’s a clear maturing of that knowledge in the industry.

What are you working on that you’d like our readers to know about?

At Huron Legal, we’re continuing to try to support these trends by offering technology everywhere where it can improve the process and make the process as cost-efficient as possible. We’ve continued, much as the industry has, to try to advance and mature those solutions. I mentioned predictive coding earlier and that has been a recurring theme for years and I think predictive coding technology has slowly continued to get better and easier and, as a result, become more adopted within the industry. We’re also seeing a lot more interest in security and with the increase in security breaches and those breaches becoming more publicized, there has been a lot more interest from our clients in understanding how we’re protecting their data, as well as what steps they can also take to protect their data. So, we have a lot of exciting things going on in that area as well.

Also, a little outside the eDiscovery realm but closely related, is cost management. We recently acquired a technology company called Sky Analytics, which focuses on helping lawyers, predominantly corporate law departments, to analyze and understand their external spend (of which discovery is a large component). It helps them to evaluate the efficiency of the services that are being provided by their outside counsel. This fits in well with our efforts to support organizations in managing their legal costs by using analytics and technology to provide meaningful, real-time insight. We’ve made some big strides in this area in the past few months and it will continue to be a significant focus for Huron Legal.

Thanks, James, for participating in the interview!

And to the readers, as always, please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic!

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscoveryDaily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Information Governance vs. Search Doesn’t Have to Be a Battle After All: eDiscovery Trends

As will soon be reinforced in our upcoming thought leader interviews, one of the major focus areas at this year’s LegalTech® New York 2015 (LTNY) was a continued emphasis on Information Governance (IG). One of our perennial interviewees, Ralph Losey, has some thoughts about the battle in the legal tech world between IG and Search and reveals that it doesn’t have to be a battle after all.

In the post Information Governance v Search: The Battle Lines Are Redrawn on his excellent e-Discovery Team® blog, Ralph states that last year, he “came to believe that Information Governance’s preoccupation with classification, retention, and destruction of information was a futile pursuit”, termed IG activities as “inefficient and doomed to failure” and instead “embraced the googlesque approach of save and search”.

When Ralph expressed those viewpoints, he (not surprisingly) “created a controversy” and received quite a backlash, including “a distinguished leader of IG who bristled at my challenges” who “insisted that everyone in her very large corporation could easily comply with her lengthy retention schedules”. However, other members of the IG leadership “responded to the opposition with dialogue”, which enabled Ralph to learn that “IG, like Search, is not a monolith, that there are various factions and groups within IG”. Ultimately, Ralph determined that his “quarrel is, instead, with the old-liners, the Records Manager strata of IG who are obsessed with ESI classification and killing” (that Ralph categorizes as “caterpillars”). “To those” (a.k.a., the “butterflies”) “who have let go of that traditional role, and already been reborn as multimodal, AI-enhanced Information experts, I have no quarrel.”

Ralph has a lot more to say in the post, noting that ESI “grows and changes too fast for traditional governance” and concludes that “Information Governance is actually a sub-set of Search, not visa versa”. He also provides a nice graphic to illustrate just how much data is created in the digital universe every 60 seconds (see the top of this post). Remember a little over a year ago, when we noted that 3.4 sextillion bytes of information had been created in close to ten months in 2013? Well, according to EMC’s latest ticker, 6.1 sextillion bytes have been created since January 1, 2014. Yikes! We’ve provided a link to another infographic at the bottom of this post, courtesy of Domo.com, that provides even more info about the amount of data created every 60 seconds. Enjoy!

By the way, Ralph just posted his 500th blog post, which is a tremendous milestone. Congrats, Ralph! Up to now, Ralph noted that he has been posting weekly (since November 2006) and his posts have “morphed into several thousand word essays”. At eDiscoveryDaily, we probably write 2,500 to 4,000 words per week over five posts; Ralph writes that much (and often more) in his one post a week.

Now, Ralph has indicated that his e-Discovery Team® blog will be changing to a monthly format and that he will begin writing the blog “for advanced readers only”. I look forward to see how the future posts will look, but will miss my Monday morning routine of sitting down with a cup of coffee and reading Ralph’s latest post (at least for the weeks without a new post). Keeping a blog going day after day (or even week after week) is not easy. Kudos to Ralph for keeping it going for over eight years (so far).

So, what do you think? Do you think the old way of information governance is “inefficient and doomed to failure”? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

P.S. — Happy Birthday to my wonderful and beautiful wife, Paige Austin!  We got engaged one year ago today.  Best thing that’s ever happened to me!  🙂

infographic

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscoveryDaily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscoveryDaily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Thursday LTNY 2015 Sessions: eDiscovery Trends

As noted yesterday and Tuesday, LegalTech® New York 2015 (LTNY) is happening this week and eDiscoveryDaily is here to report about the latest eDiscovery trends being discussed at the show. This is the last day to check out the show if you’re in the New York area with a number of sessions (both paid and free) available and over 199 exhibitors providing information on their products and services.

While at the show, we will (also for the fifth year in a row!) be interviewing several industry thought leaders to see what they think are the significant trends for 2015 and, which of those are evident at LTNY. After the show, we will announce the series of thought leader interviews and identify when each will be published. Mark your calendars!

Perform a “find” on today’s LTNY conference schedule for “discovery” or “information governance” and you’ll get 33 hits. So, there is plenty to talk about! Sessions in the main conference tracks include:

10:30 – 11:45 AM:

Information Governance in the Now

According to the Information Governance Initiative’s Annual Report, Information Governance (IG) practitioners “are taking action on a wide variety of IG projects right now. On average, SMBs have four IG projects under way, and large organizations have six.” This session will explore where IG stands today as a concept, as a practice and as a market; uncovering the projects that are getting funding, the technologies that are enabling action and the governance structures that are getting the most attention.

At the end of this session you will have a clear picture of where the IG market really is so you can catch the wave and get started delivering value to your clients and organizations right now.

Speakers to include: Julie Colgan (Discussion Leader), Head of Information Governance Solutions, Nuix; James Arnold, Managing Director of Forensic Services, KPMG; Lauren Barnes, VP Records and Information Management, Credit Suisse; Jay Brudz, Partner, Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP; Fred Pulzello, President, ARMA International.

Transforming Discovery Through Data Management

With data growing exponentially, legal counsel is struggling to control eDiscovery costs. However, they can now effectively find potentially relevant documents earlier in the process with greater accuracy than ever before.   By combining technology and analytical expertise, it is now possible to gather early stage legal intelligence to develop case strategy and limit that amount of data promoted to review.

Speakers to include: Dave Deppe, President, UnitedLex Corporation; Jacob J. Herstek, Vice President and Senior Legal Counsel, HSBC Bank USA, NA; Lynn S. Looby, Managing Counsel for Litigation, Regulatory & U.S. Operations, The Dow Chemical Company; Farrah Pepper, Executive Counsel – Discovery, General Electric Company.

12:15 – 1:30 PM:

The Convergence of Information Security and IG

Gartner analysts Ted Friedman and Tom Scholtz have forecast that “by 2017, 40% of Global 1000 organizations will have aligned their information management governance and information security governance programs.” However, this prediction raises a variety of questions about how and why such a convergence might occur.

Nuix engaged Ari Kaplan Advisors to interview Fortune 1000 IS leaders to answer some of these questions for a benchmarking report and, among other conclusions, found that organizations know they must adopt a new set of information security disciplines to protect high-value and high-risk data. IG professionals must also play a critical role in helping to identify where important data is stored, understanding what it’s worth and making sure it’s protected.

Information security disciplines are at the heart of a good information governance framework. And failing to implement a robust information governance framework can be costly if it fails to prevent a data breach or minimize its consequences.

Speakers to include: Ari Kaplan (Discussion Leader), Principal, Ari Kaplan Advisors; Jim Kent, Global Head of Investigations & Cybersecurity, Nuix; Andre McGregor, Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation; Alison North, Director, ARMA International Board of Directors, CEO, AN Information Ltd.; Amie Taal, Vice President, Security and Investigations Deutsche Bank.

Protecting Employee and Customer Privacy in an Era of ‘Big Data’ Monitoring

Corporations and governments are accelerating the collection and analysis of data about our personal and professional lives. The Internet of Things has not only enhanced consumer convenience, but also spawned a vast network of data collection mechanisms, such as smart phones, computer operating systems, websites, point-of-sale terminals, email accounts, social media postings, watches, automobile navigation systems and even asthma inhalers. One of the greatest challenges to an organization is balancing the benefits—such as product development, sales and marketing—of this data avalanche with the need to protect the privacy of its employees and customers.

In this session, panelists will review the myriad ways in which we are monitored and how that information is used, and share best practices in policy and security controls to protect employees and customers. The panelists will address the following:

  • How and why we are monitored — and how that information is used
  • Best practices in policy and security controls to protect employees and customers
  • Effective privacy, computer, BYOD and network usage policies
  • Reasonable expectations of privacy
  • The evolution of U.S. privacy laws and their effects on employees and consumers

Speakers to include: Jason R. Baron (Discussion Leader), Of Counsel, Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP; Alan Friel, Partner, BakerHostetler; Julia Horwitz, Consumer Protection Counsel, Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC); Heidi Wachs, Special Counsel, Jenner & Block; Sheryl Ann Yamuder, Senior Managing Counsel, Privacy & Data Protection, MasterCard.

2:00 – 3:00 PM:

Information Governance 2020 and Beyond

Over the next decade, technological and economic changes will challenge businesses; new data consumers, types, sources and endpoints will require businesses to continually adapt their information governance and security policies or risk losing data integrity. But what does the future really hold for Information Governance (IG)?

This panel of IG visionaries will look into their crystal balls and deliver predictions about IG of the future, considering topics such as cloud, mobility and the Internet of Things (IoT).

This is a must-attend session that will get your creativity flowing and inspire you to embrace the future to deliver best-in-class governance to your organizations and clients.

Speakers to include: Julie Colgan (Discussion Leader), Head of Information Governance Solutions, Nuix; Barclay Blair, Founder and Executive Director, IG Initiative, Principal and Founder, ViaLumina LLC; Chris Dale, The eDisclosure Information Project; Leigh Isaacs, Director of Records and Information Governance, Orrick, Herrington and Sutcliffe LLP, Advisory Board Member, IG Initiative.

In addition to these, there are other eDiscovery-related sessions today. For a complete description for all sessions today, click here.

eDiscoveryDaily will also be “tweeting” periodically throughout LTNY, so feel free to check out our updates at twitter.com/Cloud9Discovery.

So, what do you think? Are you planning to attend LTNY this year? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscoveryDaily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscoveryDaily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Wednesday LTNY 2015 Sessions: eDiscovery Trends

As noted yesterday, LegalTech® New York 2015 (LTNY) is happening this week and eDiscoveryDaily is here to report about the latest eDiscovery trends being discussed at the show. There’s still time to check out the show if you’re in the New York area with a number of sessions (both paid and free) available and over 199 exhibitors providing information on their products and services.

While at the show, we will (also for the fifth year in a row!) be interviewing several industry thought leaders to see what they think are the significant trends for 2015 and, which of those are evident at LTNY. After the show, we will announce the series of thought leader interviews and identify when each will be published. Mark your calendars!

Perform a “find” on today’s LTNY conference schedule for “discovery” or “information governance” and you’ll get 66 hits. So, there is plenty to talk about! Sessions in the main conference tracks include:

10:30 – 11:45 AM:

Data Preservation in a User-Centric Mobile, Social and Cloud World

The cloud is no longer a novelty, social is not just for social, and mobile is fast becoming central, yet for eDiscovery professionals these environments are still often seen as unavoidable annoyances. Learn how successful corporations are implementing proactive litigation readiness plans for cloud solutions, social networks, and mobile endpoints — saving time, cost, risk, and hassles while letting their users work the way they want to.

Speakers to include: Neil Etheridge (Discussion Leader), Vice President, Product Marketing, Recommind; Robert Owen, Partner , Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP; Dave Packer, Sr. Director, Product Marketing, Druva; Alex Ponce de Leon, Discovery Counsel, Google; Justin Somaini , Chief Trust Officer, Box, Inc..

Analytics and Information Governance

As information proliferates, organizations need to adopt enterprise-wide Information Governance practices and make proactive policy decisions about what information is important to the organization, how to keep and manage it, and how to defensibly dispose of it. Data analytics are a smart way to gain an understanding of an organization’s information, both broadly and specifically, and to analyze or categorize it in order to facilitate business decisions, support defensible disposition, and more. This interactive panel discussion will address the information governance challenges organizations face and how analytics can help, including specific examples such as defensible destruction.

Speakers to include: Laurie Fischer (Discussion Leader) , Managing Director, Huron Legal; Jon M. Talotta , Partner, Hogan Lovells; Brett Tarr, Counsel Litigation & E-Discovery , Caesars Entertainment; Kurt Wilhelm , Director – Information Governance, NBCUniversal.

Predictive Coding: Succeed or Screw Up? How to Evaluate (and Validate) Results in Your Next Predictive Coding Project

It is no longer a matter of “if” you use predictive coding; “how” you conduct predictive coding is the critical question. With the training, prediction, and evaluation stages being an iterative process, how do you validate results and know when to stop review? This session will help you understand the methods and key metrics for evaluating effectiveness in your next predictive coding project.

Speakers to include: Jonathan Sachs (Discussion Leader), Senior Account Executive, Kroll Ontrack; Cliff Dutton, Senior Vice President & Director of eDiscovery and Vendor Management , AIG; Shannon Kirk, E-Discovery Counsel, Ropes & Gray; Ralph Losey, Shareholder, Jackson Lewis P.C.

12:30 – 1:30 PM:

Future-Proof Your eDiscovery Practices – OPEN TO ALL

It’s clear that the eDiscovery landscape is constantly changing. Trends and vendors often come and go, leaving organizations in a constant state of reacting to what’s next. Those organizations that are prepared for evolving conditions can better balance value and risk – thus future proofing their eDiscovery practices. In this panel, learn from proven eDiscovery experience and historical perspective on how the market has evolved in the past two decades – and how previous trends and market forces will help determine where the industry may be headed. You’ll leave knowing what your organizations can do now to minimize future risk and how to take full advantage of the value that emerging technologies will offer.

Speakers to include: George Tziahanas (Discussion Leader) , VP, Legal and Compliance Solutions, HP; Patrick Collins, Partner, Perkins Coie; Dr. Bruce V. Hartley, CISSP, VP, Celerity Consulting Group, Inc.; Jessica Watts, Associate General Counsel,, eDiscovery HP.

2:00 – 3:15 PM:

User-Defined Predictive Coding for Fact Finding and Prioritized Review

It’s easy to think of machine learning only when reviewing for large productions, however, forward-thinking users are applying it to drive internal investigations, analyze government-seized data stores, quality-check manual review, and much more. Come learn creative strategies for combining search and analytics for powerful fact finding and cost savings across a range of real-world use cases.

Speakers to include: Hal Marcus (Discussion Leader), Product Marketing Manager, Recommind; Florinda Baldridge, Global Director of Practice Support, Norton Rose Fulbright; Jay Brudz, Partner, Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP; David L. Stanton, Partner, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP.

Analytics to Enhance Litigation and Discovery Strategy

The “buzz” in the past few years has been about predictive coding as an analytical tool to facilitate document review. Predictive coding is just one of many analytical tools that can aid the discovery process, however, and document production is just one use for discovery analytics. This panel will discuss the range of analytical tools for discovery and creative ways they can be used to assist with early case assessment, litigation strategy, and discovery strategy, allowing counsel to better focus on developing the legal case and clients to make more informed decisions about case disposition. As an added bonus, their effective use can result in significant cost savings.

Speakers to include: Nathalie Hofman (Discussion Leader) , Managing Director, Huron Legal; Ignatius Grande, Senior Discovery Attorney/Director of PracticeSupport, Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP; Mollie C. Nichols , Partner, Redgrave LLP; Glenn O’Brien , Director, Electronic Discovery, Liberty Mutual Insurance; Farrah Short, Associate , Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C..

Machine Learning from Pre-Discovery to eDiscovery and Everything In-between

Find out how machine learning is impacting all areas of information governance, realizing the promises of knowledge management, records management, and eDiscovery.

  • How can machine learning enable organizations to get ahead of the curve in eDiscovery and be better prepared for a matter?
  • How does machine learning facilitate areas of information governance such as defensible deletion, surveillance and compliance, records management and applying retention policies to electronic archiving?
  • How do corporate counsel and attorneys apply machine learning capabilities to unstructured content to better address information governance requirements?

Hear our expert panelists share ways machine learning technology is being applied throughout all areas of the information governance spectrum, with compelling, pragmatic examples and case studies demonstrating an entirely new paradigm with unstructured corporate content.

Speakers to include: Ari Kaplan (Discussion Leader), Principal, Ari Kaplan Advisors; Jeff Fehrman, Chief Strategy Officer, Mindseye; Constantine Pappas, Product Specialist, Computer-assisted Review, kCura; Rick Wilson, Vice President of Strategy and Solutions, Sherpa Software.

Global: Around the World in Less than 80 Minutes – Delivering Successful eDiscovery Projects Across the Globe

EDiscovery is approached differently in almost every country around the world, and international eDiscovery best practices are evolving quickly in response to international litigation and investigations. Knowing the country’s approach to eDiscovery is integral to ensuring that a multi-national eDiscovery project goes smoothly. This panel, comprised of eDiscovery experts from around the world, will discuss:

  • The biggest differences in approaches to eDiscovery in the US, EU and APAC
  • How the extraterritorial effect of US regulation affects global companies’ eDiscovery tactics
  • Why eDiscovery is on the rise in European countries like Germany and France and how to handle local requirements
  • Political, cultural and legislative sensitivities towards eDiscovery in China, Japan, Singapore and other countries in the APAC region – and how to deal with them

Techniques for managing eDiscovery in international cases and on multiple fronts.

Speakers to include: Andrew Szczech (Discussion Leader) , Director of Legal Technologies Services, EMEA, Legal Technologies, Kroll Ontrack UK; Brian Calla, Member, Eckert Seamans; Kate Chan, Managing Director, Kroll Ontrack APAC; Emily A. Cobb, Associate, Ropes & Gray; Jerami D. Kemnitz, Senior Discovery Counsel – Global Head of eDiscovery, Wells Fargo.

3:45 – 5:00 PM:

User-Centric Protocols for Advanced Review

Recent noteworthy judicial opinions have a lot to say about practical aspects of predictive coding-enabled review – such as search term culling, seed set sharing, workflow transparency, ESI orders, and the timing of discovery challenges. Come learn what these opinions do (and don’t yet) tell us, and how the new CTRL Initiative’s open-source guidelines can help users chart a flexible course for advanced review.

Speakers to include: Philip Favro (Discussion Leader), Senior Discovery Counsel, Recommind; Honorable James C. Francis IV, U.S. Magistrate Judge , U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York; Dawson Horn, III, Esq., Associate General Counsel, AIG; Darin Sands, Shareholder, Lane Powell.

Information Governance: Applying Technology to Information Governance: Data Management, Litigation Holds, Records Retention and Destruction

This panel will help attendees understand how information governance maturity can be developed from much of what we have learned in eDiscovery. The panel will talk about what information governance (IG) is, how to develop IG programs, and what IG projects companies are undertaking today, such as defensible data remediation, intelligent migration, and using eDiscovery and analytics technology for information governance purposes.

Speakers to include: Cathleen Peterson (Discussion Leader), Senior Vice President, Consulting and Advanced Review Services, Kroll Ontrack; Bennett Borden, Partner, Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP; Jessica Escalera, Global Head of Legal Discovery Operations, Barclays; D. Casey Flaherty, Corporate Counsel, Kia Motors America, Inc.; David L. Stanton, Partner, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP.

In addition to these, there are other eDiscovery-related sessions today. For a complete description for all sessions today, click here.

eDiscoveryDaily will also be “tweeting” periodically throughout LTNY, so feel free to check out our updates at twitter.com/Cloud9Discovery.

So, what do you think? Are you planning to attend LTNY this year? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscoveryDaily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscoveryDaily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Welcome to LegalTech New York 2015!: eDiscovery Trends

Today is the start of LegalTech® New York 2015 (LTNY) and, for the fifth year in a row, eDiscoveryDaily is here to report about the latest eDiscovery trends being discussed at the show. Over the next three days, we will provide a description each day of some of the sessions related to eDiscovery to give you a sense of the topics being covered. If you’re in the New York area, I encourage you to check out the show – there are a number of sessions (both paid and free) available and over 199 exhibitors providing information on their products and services.

While at the show, we will (also for the fifth year in a row!) be interviewing several industry thought leaders to see what they think are the significant trends for 2015 and, which of those are evident at LTNY. After the show, we will announce the series of thought leader interviews and identify when each will be published. Mark your calendars!

Perform a “find” on today’s LTNY conference schedule for “discovery” or “information governance” and you’ll get 84 hits. So, there is plenty to talk about! Sessions in the main conference tracks include:

10:30 – 11:45 AM:

Information Management in the Age of the New Attorney

Some of the biggest changes currently in the legal IT environment are coming from the changing expectations and methods by which today’s attorneys want to work. As a new generation of attorneys rises to firm management, how does traditional information management need to change to accommodate the always-on, mobile, social, attorney? How can firms take advantage of new approaches to gain greater agility and better meet attorney – and client – demands for access to key information?

In this panel discussion, we will explore these topics with a panel of CIOs and IT Directors, and review what their organizations are doing to meet attorney and client expectations today as well as plans and ideas for the (near) future.

Speakers to include: Dan Carmel (Discussion Leader), Head of ECM Strategy and Solutions, HP Big Data; Marat Borodovskiy, IS Director, Prudential; Bill Koch, Director of Technology Services, Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, LLP; Glenn O’Brien, Director, Electronic Discovery, Liberty Mutual Insurance; Usman Nayyar, Director of Applications and Technology Solutions, Proskauer.

Information Governance and E-Discovery – Working Across Disciplines to Improve Outcomes and Add Value

In conversations among thought-leading legal professionals and technologists, the subject of “information governance” features prominently. But how do these leaders define information governance, and why has the topic become so important? And what is the relationship to e-discovery?

In this program, panelists at the forefront of information governance will discuss the various ways in which their discipline relates to e-discovery. They will explain how a sound information governance initiative can help make e-discovery more efficient and effective, and less expensive. And they will help us understand how, in turn, a thoughtful and strategic e-discovery program can contribute back to the organization’s information governance. The panel will offer practical advice on breaking down silos and working across disciplines to create and enhance that information value loop.

Speakers to include: Maureen O’Neill (Discussion Leader), Senior Vice President, Discovery Strategy, DiscoverReady; Lauren Barnes, VP Records and Information Management, Credit Suisse; Juliet M. Hanna, Associate General Counsel, Fannie Mae; Julie Heller, VP & Global Head of eDiscovery Programs, Legal Operations Center, AIG.

Advice from Counsel: Case Studies of What’s Working in E-Discovery Today

Forget the theoretical. This is pure brass tacks. E-discovery practitioners are streamlining their processes, using advanced technology, and dramatically reducing the cost of e-discovery. In-house counsel, litigation support, outside counsel and service providers are all playing a part in transforming chaotic e-discovery procedures into a regular business process. This case study session will showcase what’s working today for corporations and law firms handling e-discovery matters large and small. Results from the 6th annual Advice from Counsel study on in-house e-discovery trends will supplement the case study discussions.

Speakers to include: Sophie Ross (Discussion Leader), Senior Managing Director, FTI Technology; Shari Aberle, Partner, Dorsey; Ari Kaplan, Principal, Ari Kaplan Advisors; Nicole Schaefer, Litigation Support Director, Janney Montgomery Scott.

Data Analytics for eDiscovery and Investigations – A Practical Approach

Data analytics on structured information (Oracle/SQL databases, mainframe data, etc.) is a specialized discipline that can help companies address issues related to litigation and sophisticated fraud and white collar crime. Forensic data analytics professionals must understand issues particular to the review of data contained in a structured format (i.e., enterprise financial systems and operational data stores). As with traditional computer forensic analysis on unstructured data, successful structured data eDiscovery is comprised of key work steps including identification, preservation, collection, processing, hosting, review, and production of structured data. This discussion will provide an overview and practical approach detailing the processes related to the analysis of structured data for eDiscovery and investigations.

Speakers to include: Tom Keegan (Discussion Leader), Principal Forensic Advisory Services, KPMG LLP; Elizabeth Asali, Litigation Counsel, GlaxoSmithKline; Jeffrey Greene, Shareholder, Greenberg Traurig; Wendy Predescu, Principal, KPMG LLP.

12:30 – 1:30 PM:

Taking TAR to the Next Level: Recent Research and the Promise of Continuous Active Learning — OPEN TO ALL

Three years ago, panelists Judge Andrew J. Peck and Maura R. Grossman introduced Technology-Assisted Review (TAR) to a standing-room-only crowd at LegalTech 2012. Since then, TAR—with its promise of substantial reduction in review costs—has entered the mainstream of high-volume discovery, both in the U.S. and around the world.

In 2015, the grand challenge is to make TAR even more accessible and more effective while addressing the real-world limitations of first-generation TAR products. Our panel will talk about the latest research on TAR protocols, focusing on newer methods like Continuous Active Learning, which have been shown to identify relevant documents more quickly, and to further reduce review costs. Discussion topics include:

  • How does Continuous Active Learning work, and how does it differ from earlier TAR protocols?
  • Which kinds of seed are most effective in TAR training, random or judgmental and why?
  • Are subject-matter experts required for TAR training, or can review teams do the job just as well?
  • How will the courts evaluate TAR and Continuous Active Learning? What kind of evidence is required to move best practices forward?
  • What kinds of savings can you expect from Continuous Active Learning versus other protocols? Should different protocols be used for different types of cases?

Join us for an informative hour focusing on the future of TAR for 2015 and beyond. Learn about the first peer-reviewed study comparing TAR protocols and how its findings may be applied in judicial and corporate settings. Pick up your free guide to Continuous Active Learning so you can learn more about this powerful new option for TAR review.

Speakers to include: John Tredennick (Discussion Leader), CEO and Founder, Catalyst Repository Systems, Inc.; Gordon V. Cormack, Professor, David R. Cheriton School of Computer Science, University of Waterloo; Maura R. Grossman, Of Counsel, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz; Susan Nielsen Hammond, Records, eDiscovery & Forensics Counsel, Regions Financial Corporation; Honorable Andrew J. Peck, Magistrate Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

2:00 – 3:15 PM:

Counsel’s Secret Weapon in the Information Wars: Governance Strategies and Tactics

Organizations face increasing pressure when responding to litigation, investigations, and regulatory compliance demands. Factors adding to this pressure are shortened time frames, increasingly disparate information, and tight budgets. It is essential to proactively prepare for these challenges with an information governance strategy that ensures your data can be accessed, analyzed, and understood quickly and cost effectively.

In this session, learn how to evaluate technology solutions, best practices for deploying these solutions in conjunction with IG policies, and how you can gain strategic insight from your data.

Speakers to include: Matt Levy (Discussion Leader), eDiscovery Subject Matter Expert, HP; Jason R. Baron, Of Counsel, Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP; Gareth Evans, Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP; Marty Provin, Executive VP, Jordan Lawrence; Jason Van Volkenburgh, Associate General Counsel, Hunter Douglas.

E-Discovery Insourcing vs Outsourcing

This session will focus on the key issues attorneys, paralegals and litigation support staff should consider when deciding whether to insource or outsource e-discovery. While they may seem elementary, time, cost and complexity continue to be some of the greatest challenges e-discovery practitioners face today. Join us as our panel discusses some of the key elements to consider when deciding on an e-discovery solution.

Speakers to include: Edward Sohn (Discussion Leader), Global Director, Legal Managed Services, Thomson Reuters; Anthony J. Diana, Partner, Reed Smith; Glen McFarlane, Managing Director, JPMorgan Chase; Karin Scholz Jenson, Partner and National Co-Leader, E-Discovery Advocacy and Management Team, BakerHostetler.

The Predictive Coding Soundtrack: Rewind, Play, Fast-Forward

Over the last several years, predictive coding dominated conversations among e-discovery practitioners. But as we move into 2015, it seems the hype about predictive coding – and the too-good-to-be-true marketing promises – have quieted down. So what are we talking about now? What are organizations actually doing today with predictive coding? And how have these conversations about predictive coding impacted other aspects of e-discovery?

This program will take a look back at the promises made about predictive coding as these powerful tools came to the e-discovery market. And then our panel of experts – including corporate practitioners who actively use predictive coding – will discuss how the tools are being deployed today. They will explain what they have learned about the most effective ways to “train” predictive coding software; how to combine predictive coding with keyword terms and other methods of narrowing and searching data sets; the importance of statistical testing and validation in e-discovery generally; and developing a strategy for involving the other side (or not) in an e-discovery process. Finally, the panel will take a look towards the future, and explore how they expect to use predictive coding and other analytics tools going forward.

Speakers to include: Amy Hinzmann (Discussion Leader), Senior Vice President, Managed Review, DiscoverReady; Marla Bergman, Vice President, Associate General Counsel, Goldman Sachs; Elizabeth A. Jaworski, Director, Legal Operations, Motorola a Lenovo Company; Daniel S. Pariser, Partner, Arnold & Porter.

3:45 – 5:00 PM:

How to Take Advantage of the Cloud for eDiscovery

Today’s eDiscovery professionals must be able to quickly respond to requests and investigations, while reducing costs at the same time. But technology can be the stumbling block that prevents many from achieving these goals—especially when legal teams spend more time and money managing hardware and software than they spend on their litigation process. Fortunately, cloud environments offer a more secure and cost-effective way.

Join this panel session to learn how emerging cloud-based, self-service deployments can empower legal professionals to focus on managing the eDiscovery process while allowing the experts to manage the technology operations and security.

Speakers to include: Eric Crespolini (Discussion Leader), eDiscovery Subject Matter Expert, HP; Johnny Lee, MD, Forensic, Investigations & Dispute Services, Grant Thornton LLP; Robert Levy, Counsel, Civil Justice Reform and Law Technology, Exxon Mobil Corporation; Alan M. Winchester, Partner, Harris Beach PLLC.

E-Discovery Challenges in Government Investigations and Regulatory Matters

When dealing with the government in an investigation or regulatory matter, organizations face unique challenges around e-discovery. The lack of e-discovery expertise among many government legal professionals, and the lack of technical support and resources available to them, can make it difficult for companies to work with the government in connection with discovery requests. Other issues that compound this difficulty include:

  • The “cooperative” posture often associated with governmental investigations;
  • the increased transparency requested by the government;
  • the broad breadth and compressed timelines associated with many government requests; and
  • the government’s increasing tendency to request the use of specific discovery protocols, including technology assisted review.

In this program, the panelists will explore how organizations can overcome these challenges and more effectively handle discovery in government matters. They will discuss how to identify the scope of the government’s request and work to appropriately tailor a discovery solution that is reasonable, cost efficient, and defensive – and if necessary, educate the agency about e-discovery along the way. The program will also explain the obligations to preserve information relevant to a government matter, and the ramifications – including criminal liability – for spoliation of evidence. Finally, the panelists will discuss the role of predictive coding and other advanced analytics in government discovery.

Speakers to include: Matt Miller (Discussion Leader), Senior Vice President, Discovery Strategy; DiscoverReady, Josh Durham, Partner, Poyner Spruill LLP; Jill Griset, Partner, McGuire Woods; Allan Hsu, Director, Fannie Mae; Jerami D. Kemnitz, Senior Discovery Counsel – Global Head of eDiscovery, Wells Fargo; Michelle Spak, Associate General Counsel, Duke Energy Corporation.

Killing Two Birds With One Stone: Optimizing Information Governance for Easier E-Discovery

From protecting sensitive customer data from cyber threats, to complying with data privacy laws, corporate information governance projects are quickly becoming “must do” projects. How can legal teams leverage these information governance projects for their own e-discovery needs? What are some of the practical steps corporations can take to produce measurable benefits from information governance? How do these information governance projects impact the role of outside counsel?

Attend this session to hear corporate practitioners discuss best practices for implementing practical information governance programs and their impact on e-discovery.

Speakers to include: Jake Frazier (Discussion Leader), Senior Managing Director, FTI Technology; Michael Lisi, Director of Litigation Support, Fidelity Investments; Rachel Rubenson, Vice President-Global eDiscovery Counsel, Barclays; Joseph Steffan, Chief Privacy Compliance Officer, Morgan Stanley.

Achieving Global Consistency Across your eDiscovery Processes

As multi-national companies continue to manage a portfolio of litigation and investigations, it has become a priority for organizations to achieve global consistency in their eDiscovery processes. Key elements in putting in place a global approach to eDiscovery include defensible processes, predictable outcomes, reduced cost and gain in efficiencies.

This presentation will detail how to achieve global consistency and ideas on areas of focus including use of discovery playbooks, standard operating procedures, checklists, using a consistent technology workflow, and the role of outside service providers.

Speakers to include: Lucie Miller (Discussion Leader), Director, KPMG LLP; Denise Backhouse, Shareholder, Littler Mendelson; Kelly Clay, Senior Counsel and Director of Information Management, GlaxoSmithKline; Michelle Mattei, Associate Director, Healthcare Compliance, Medivation, Inc.; Jeff Sharer, Partner, Sidley Austin LLP.

In addition to these, there are other eDiscovery-related sessions today. For a complete description for all sessions today, click here.

eDiscoveryDaily will also be “tweeting” periodically throughout LTNY, so feel free to check out our updates at twitter.com/Cloud9Discovery.

So, what do you think? Are you planning to attend LTNY this year? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscoveryDaily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscoveryDaily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Get a Jump on Information Governance Best Practices at LegalTech with this Boot Camp: eDiscovery Trends

Last year, the Information Governance Initiative (IGI), a cross-disciplinary consortium and think tank focused on advancing information governance was launched (we covered it here and here). Now, for New Yorkers and early birds to next week’s LegalTech® show, the IGI has partnered with Cardozo School of Law, in association with LegalTech New York, to bring you a one-day information governance boot camp next Monday, February 2.

The boot camp is designed exclusively for corporate legal, IT, RIM, and compliance professionals to help them begin implementing information governance (IG) programs in their organizations. The workshop will provide a forum for IG practitioners to exchange experiences, best practices, and ideas related to current and emerging issues with planning and executing an IG strategy while gaining knowledge from the IGI Executive Team. The boot camp runs from 9:30am to 3:00pm, with a cocktail hour afterward – the first of many cocktail hours that will happen next week at the show, no doubt. 🙂

Here are titles of the sessions during the boot camp (interspersed with networking/bio breaks and lunch at 12:15):

  • 10 – 11 a.m.: Identifying and Coordinating the Facets of IG
  • 11:15 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.: Forming & Running an IG Steering Committee
  • 1 – 2 p.m.: Taking Action: Quick & Dirty or Big Bang?
  • 2:15 – 2:45 p.m.: Technology Presentation

The boot camp is being held at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, 55 Fifth Avenue (at 12th Street), Room 1008, New York, New York 10003. Registration starts at 9:00am, with an initial “Setting the Stage” session starting at 9:30am. The workshop registration fee is $795. Registration includes meeting materials; a reception following the boot camp; lunch; and breaks while the workshop is in session. The deadline for workshop registration is tomorrow – to register, click here. Hurry if you want to attend!

So, what do you think? Has Information Governance become a big focus in your organization? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscoveryDaily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscoveryDaily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.