AI

For more than a decade, enterprise IT strategy favored an almost singular mission: get as many data and business processes as possible into the public cloud. While that approach unlocked scalability, rapid provisioning, and new ways of working, a “Cloud Reset” is now reshaping enterprise infrastructure strategy with major implications for government agencies, legal operations, litigation support teams, and corporate legal departments.  

What Is the Cloud Reset? 

The Cloud Reset refers to a growing trend where organizations are rebalancing their cloud strategies, moving critical workloads back into private cloud and on-premise environments, and choosing the most appropriate infrastructure for each workload rather than defaulting to public cloud. A Fortune 100 corporation recently shared its research that 69% of surveyed enterprises are considering repatriating workloads, and more than one-third have already done so. At the same time, private cloud is now being seen as a strategic platform equal to public cloud, not a fallback.  

This shift is especially relevant as enterprises build environments for AI, data governance, compliance, and cost control; areas where private infrastructure often has significant advantages. The cloud reset strategy approaches a thoughtful hybrid approach rather than an “all cloud” or “all on-premise” policy.  

The Three Core Drivers of the Cloud Reset 

1. Cost Management & Predictability

Public cloud pricing models, especially for storage, egress, compute, and AI inference, are often unpredictable over the long term. Many enterprises report spending waste that exceeds 25% or more on public cloud bills. The private cloud and on-premise models bring cost predictability, transparent budgeting, and lower total cost of ownership, especially for steady and regulated workloads.  

2. Greater Data Control & Security

Security and compliance are now leading drivers for repatriation. In the Fortune 100 corporation’s surveys, 92% of IT leaders say they trust private cloud for security and compliance, and many firms prefer to retain sensitive data behind their own firewalls. This is particularly acute for regulated industries and organizations subject to strict privacy laws: scenarios common in legal holds, investigations, and litigation matters.  

3. AI Workloads Demand Specialized Infrastructure

As CIOs and CTOs plan AI strategies, they want environments that combine performance, data privacy, and governance. Over half of enterprises prefer private cloud for AI model training and inference, where the costs and risks of using third-party infrastructure can be prohibitive.  

 What This Means for Legal Departments & eDiscovery 

The same pressures shaping enterprise IT are informing eDiscovery and litigation-ready infrastructure decisions: 

• Data volumes and complexities are increasing rapidly, especially with modern data sources like Slack, Teams, mobile messaging, and AI-generated content. 

• Regulatory scrutiny and internal investigations demand clear ownership and control of sensitive information. 

• Budget transparency and cost containment are now board-level expectations in many corporations. 

Yet many legal teams still rely on “cloud by default” strategies for eDiscovery processing, review, and litigation support. This exposes them to variable costs, third-party control over data, and limited governance, exactly the challenges that are pushing IT leaders toward private cloud and on-premise deployment models. 

 Bringing the Reset to Legal Workflows 

CloudNine Review On-Premise: Controlled, Predictable eDiscovery 

Legal teams need platforms that mirror the enterprise shift toward predictability, governance, and security: 

• Full control of sensitive data: Data stays within corporate infrastructure, under internal security policies.  

• Predictable, fixed costs: Unlike usage-based cloud fees, on-premise deployments bring budgeting clarity ideal for litigation holds, internal investigations, general litigation and fixed-fee engagements.  

• Alignment with legal and IT policies: On-premise platforms allow legal to comply with internal controls and security frameworks without relying on external hosting.  

As more corporations recalibrate cloud spend and place workloads where they deliver the most value, CloudNine Review On-Premise provides the equivalent in the legal tech stack; a way to keep mission-critical data processing and review within controlled boundaries. 

CloudNine LAW: The Cornerstone of On-Premise Processing 

Before case data ever reaches review, processing and culling must occur efficiently and securely. CloudNine LAW delivers: 

• End-to-end control over ingestion, imaging, OCR, deduplication, and production workflows.  

• Robust support for thousands of file types and complex data sources common in modern investigations.  

• Cost efficiencies through fixed licensing rather than volume-based fees. Even if SaaS review is budgeted for the case, pre-culling that data before review can save huge hosting expenses. 

• Integration with review platforms – bridging on-premise processing with downstream analytics and review.  

For legal operations that must operate with fiscal discipline and defensible processes, CloudNine LAW and CloudNine Review stand as a compelling private infrastructure equivalent and is tightly aligned with the Cloud Reset’s emphasis on control, predictability, and governance.  

 Conclusion: Embrace Strategic Choice 

The Cloud Reset signals an important evolution in how organizations think about infrastructure: cloud isn’t the only destination; the right environment is. The same principle should apply to legal technology stacks. It isn’t “cloud only” or “on-premise” only; it’s evaluating the various business silo’s and units on what can be deployed that is in-line with the organization’s objectives of cost, privacy and security. 

Rather than treating cloud as default, legal teams should design hybrid environments that let them: 

• Retain sensitive data where governance demands it 

• Predict and control costs in budget-sensitive matters 

• Integrate tightly with internal IT and compliance frameworks 

Platforms like CloudNine Review On-Premise and CloudNine LAW empower legal departments to operationalize the Cloud Reset in their workflows bringing eDiscovery, review, and litigation readiness into environments built for control, value, and strategic alignment with broader enterprise IT goals. 

Over the last decade, the eDiscovery market has experienced a dramatic shift. What was once a landscape that supported both on-premise and hosted review platforms has now become overwhelmingly cloud-centric. Today, nearly every major review platform has transitioned to a SaaS model with some that actively forced clients to migrate, leaving few modern on-premise options available. 

While cloud-based review platforms offer undeniable advantages such as scalability, rapid deployment, and remote access, this industry-wide transition has also created an unintended consequence: a growing vacuum for organizations that still require on-premise review. For many legal teams, cloud-only is not a preference, it’s a limitation. 

The Disappearance of On-Premise Review Platforms 

The move to cloud review platforms has largely been driven by software provider economics and market demand for flexible, subscription-based services. As a result, legacy on-premise platforms have been sunset, deprioritized, or left without meaningful innovation. In many cases, organizations that relied on on-premise review have been given little choice but to migrate their cases and business models to the cloud. 

Yet the disappearance of these platforms does not mean the underlying need has vanished. Instead, it has exposed a critical gap between what cloud-only vendors offer and what many organizations require to operate effectively, securely, and profitably. 

Why On-Premise Review Still Matters 

Despite the prevalence of SaaS platforms, there are clear and compelling reasons why on-premise review remains essential for key segments of the legal market. 

Security and Compliance 

For corporations in highly regulated industries and government agencies operating under strict data governance mandates, data control is non-negotiable. Many organizations are required to keep sensitive information within their own infrastructure due to regulatory obligations, internal security frameworks, or data sovereignty concerns. In these environments, cloud deployment introduces risk, complexity, and extensive oversight requirements that on-premise solutions naturally avoid. 

Cost Control and Predictability 

Cloud pricing models often rely on consumption-based fees tied to data volumes, storage duration, and user activity. While this may work for some matters, it can introduce cost volatility that is incompatible with fixed-fee litigation, internal investigations, and budget-sensitive cases. On-premise review platforms offer predictable costs, allowing law firms and corporate legal teams to manage expenses with far greater certainty.

Business Model Flexibility for Legal Service Providers 

Legal service providers have historically relied on on-premise review platforms to offer hosted review services without sharing margins with SaaS vendors. As cloud-only platforms have become the norm, profit-sharing models have shifted more revenue toward technology providers and away from service organizations. The lack of modern on-premise options limits a provider’s ability to control pricing, differentiate services, and maintain profitability. 

Specialized Law Firm Use Cases 

Even law firms that broadly embrace cloud review often encounter scenarios where on-premise review makes more sense. Cost-sensitive matters, internal client requirements, fixed-fee engagements, or unique workflow demands can all benefit from an in-house review platform that provides control without recurring hosting costs. 

A Market Gap That Can No Longer Be Ignored 

The eDiscovery industry’s near-exclusive focus on cloud deployment has left many organizations with no suitable solution. Corporations and government agencies are forced to accept compromises or implement costly governance controls. Legal service providers lose margin and autonomy. Law firms are left balancing client demands against unpredictable costs. 

This is not a shrinking niche; it is a persistent and underserved segment of the market that has been waiting for a modern, viable on-premise alternative. 

Introducing CloudNine Review On-Premise 

CloudNine is addressing this gap with the upcoming release of CloudNine Review On-Premise, designed specifically to meet the needs of organizations that require full control over their review environment without sacrificing modern review capabilities. 

CloudNine Review On-Premise is built to deliver the functionality, performance, and usability expected from contemporary review platforms, while allowing organizations to deploy and manage the system entirely within their own infrastructure. 

This approach enables: 

• Complete ownership and control of sensitive data 
• Alignment with internal security, compliance, and governance requirements 
• Predictable costs without cloud hosting fees 
• Freedom from SaaS profit-sharing models 
• Support for cost-sensitive and fixed-fee matters 
• Gives case team options for either SaaS or on-premise CloudNine Review 

By offering a true on-premise alternative, CloudNine empowers legal service providers, corporations, government agencies, and law firms to regain control over how review is delivered and priced. 

The Future of eDiscovery Is About Choice 

The evolution of eDiscovery does not point to a cloud-only future, it points to a future defined by flexibility and choice. Cloud platforms will continue to play an important role, but they are not the answer for every organization or every matter. 

With CloudNine Review On-Premise, the industry gains a modern solution for those who cannot, or should not, move everything to the cloud. As data volumes grow, compliance requirements tighten, and cost pressures increase, the return of a robust on-premise review platform represents not a step backward, but a strategic step forward. 

For organizations seeking control, predictability, and independence, CloudNine Review On-Premise is positioned to fill a long-standing gap in the eDiscovery market. 

Note: This is a continuation of our article: Why On-Premise Still Matters: How CloudNine LAW Empowers Secure, Cost-Effective Data Processing 

As legal discovery continues to evolve, so does the data at its core. Collaboration platforms, cloud-based enterprise tools, and mobile devices now generate the majority of potentially relevant evidence. Slack, Microsoft Teams, M365 workloads, and smartphone data are no longer edge cases, they are the case. 

Yet amid rapid innovation and the rise of cloud-only review solutions, one truth remains clear: on-premise review platforms still play a critical and necessary role in the legal discovery ecosystem, especially when paired with robust, modern data processing engines like CloudNine LAW. 

For many organizations, keeping data behind their own firewall is not a legacy preference, it’s a requirement. 

The Reality of Modern Data in eDiscovery 

Today’s evidence that is present in matters routinely involve: 

• Slack JSON exports with complex threading, reactions, edits, and attachments 
• Microsoft Teams and M365 data, spanning chats, channels, shared files, and metadata 
• Corporate cloud data, including OneDrive, SharePoint, and enterprise messaging 
• Mobile device collections, such as: 
• • Oxygen Forensics .dat exports 
  • Cellebrite UFDR files 
  • PinPoint Labs, ModeOne and other forensic smartphone extractions used in investigations and litigation 

This data is highly structured, deeply nested, and context-dependent. Reviewing it defensibly requires more than simple ingestion, it demands processing sophistication, normalization, and preservation of relationships before attorneys ever begin review. Though many platforms like CloudNine Review have automated these processes, a robust on-premise processing platform is necessary to ensure all traditional and modern data can be processed properly and in a short timeframe. 

Why On-Premise Review Is Becoming More Essential 

While SaaS review platforms offer flexibility, many legal teams, corporations, and government entities still require on-premise review environments for reasons that include security, cost predictability and regulatory requirements. 

1. Data Control and Security

For regulated industries, government agencies, and organizations handling sensitive investigations, data cannot leave internal infrastructure. 

On-premise review platforms ensure: 

• Data stays behind the client’s firewall 
• Internal security, access controls, and monitoring policies remain intact 
• No third-party hosting risks or cross-tenant exposure 

This level of control is often non-negotiable for matters involving trade secrets, internal investigations, national security, or regulatory scrutiny. 

2. Seamless Integration with Forensic Collections

Modern discovery frequently begins with forensic tools like Oxygen Forensics and Cellebrite, especially when mobile data is involved. Most SaaS platforms have some automation with importing these collection exports, but oftentimes, that automation doesn’t allow for customization. It is important that when the data is still in the lab, there is a local platform that can manage the complete process before “per GB” pricing SaaS solutions host that data.  

When review platforms integrate directly with advanced processing systems like CloudNine LAW, organizations can: 

• Ingest .dat and UFDR files without breaking forensic integrity 
• Preserve message hierarchies, timestamps, and device metadata 
• Cull down the data before review by date, custodian, key words etc. but also keeping the data available to supplement the review as needed. 
• Normalize mobile data into reviewable formats without flattening or breaking context especially when communications/conversations are across multiple platforms. 

This creates a defensible, end-to-end workflow from collection to processing to review to production entirely within the organization’s infrastructure. 

3. True Processing Power for Modern Data Types

As we see above, not all “processing” is created equal especially when it comes to automation. Having on-premise options allows for those one-off or more thorough and efficient data processing management. For instance: 

Slack, Teams, and M365 data require: 

• Thread reconstruction 
• Entity Normalization 
• Attachment association 
• Metadata normalization 
• Conversation context preservation 

CloudNine LAW delivers full, robust processing of traditional and modern data sources (over 5,200 file types), transforming raw exports like Slack JSON or Teams data into attorney-ready review content in a native review format verses converting everything to static PDF, RSMF or Tiff documents which creates a significant rise in per GB hosting fees.  

When paired with an on-premise review platform, legal teams gain: 

• Confidence that context has not been lost because of the full control of the data 
• Accurate conversation rendering and showing cross channel communications in context 
• Searchable, reviewable and production data 

This is especially critical when defending discovery decisions or responding to challenges in court that relate to any part of the post collection discovery process. 

4. Performance at Scale Without Bandwidth Constraints

Large matters, second requests and internal investigations often involve terabytes of data with tight production deadlines and sometimes. Moving that data to the cloud can introduce: 

• Long upload times 
• Bandwidth bottlenecks 
• Increased costs and delays 

Even though SaaS platforms like CloudNine Review have optimized data upload speeds, on-premise review platforms eliminate those constraints by keeping processing and review local. Data moves faster, review starts sooner, and teams maintain predictable performance especially at scale. 

5. Defensibility and Audit Readiness

When discovery workflows remain fully integrated from collection platforms to processing engines to review platforms organizations benefit from: 

• Clear chain of custody 
• Repeatable, documented workflows 
• Reduced risk of data alteration or loss 

For investigations, regulatory responses, and litigation, defensibility isn’t optional it’s foundational. Having the full suite of platforms behind the firewall ensure that all processes fit the necessary parameters verses always ensuring third party companies and platforms are 100% aligned with the corporate requirements.  

The Best of Both Worlds: Modern Processing + On-Prem Review 

The future of legal discovery isn’t about choosing between modern innovation and proven infrastructure. It’s about combining them. 

By pairing CloudNine LAW’s advanced processing capabilities with the upcoming on-premise CloudNine Review platform, organizations can: 

• Handle today’s most complex data types 
• Integrate forensic mobile data and corporate data collections seamlessly 
• Maintain security, compliance, and control 
• Deliver efficient and defensible review workflows 

This dual platform approach recognizes the reality of modern data continued growth in new data types while creating a standardized processing and review process. Further to that, if the review of that data makes sense in a SaaS platform, the CloudNine ecosystem allows for agility without continued training.  

Conclusion 

On-premise review platforms are not a relic of the past, but they are a critical component of a modern, flexible and cost predictable eDiscovery strategy. 

As data sources grow more complex and investigations more sensitive, legal teams need solutions that offer power, integration, and control. With CloudNine LAW at the core of processing and review environments securely deployed behind the client’s firewall, organizations don’t have to compromise. 

They get the best of modern discovery management efficiencies on their terms.

In an era where nearly every technology headline seems to focus on the cloud, it’s easy to assume that all data processing and document management solutions have moved there. For many organizations, cloud-based discovery tools have indeed brought tremendous flexibility and scalability. 

But for others, especially those managing sensitive, high-volume, or budget-conscious projects, on-premise solutions remain essential. That’s where CloudNine LAW continues to play a critical role.

The Shift to the Cloud—But Not for Everyone 

There’s no question that the cloud has transformed the eDiscovery landscape. Centralized hosting, rapid scalability, and collaboration tools make it a natural fit for many modern teams. However, the move to the cloud isn’t always seamless or suitable for every organization. 

Many legal departments, government agencies, and service providers face ongoing challenges that make on-premise solutions like LAW a better fit: 

• Data sensitivity and security concerns: Some matters involve highly confidential information like government data, trade secrets, or privileged communications that organizations aren’t comfortable hosting externally. 

• Regulatory and compliance requirements: Certain industries are governed by strict data-handling rules that require information to remain within a specific physical or network boundary. 

• Cost predictability: Cloud solutions often rely on consumption-based pricing models that can fluctuate dramatically depending on data size or user activity. 

• Infrastructure investment: Many organizations already maintain robust local infrastructure and staff capable of managing on-prem systems efficiently. 

The Case for On-Premise Processing and Document Scanning 

For teams that value control, cost management, and data sovereignty, CloudNine LAW delivers a comprehensive, proven platform for document imaging and eDiscovery processing and all within your own environment. 

Here’s why LAW continues to stand apart: 

1. Total Control Over Data Security

LAW operates fully on-premise, allowing organizations to manage and secure their data within their own network. This eliminates third-party exposure and aligns with stringent privacy, compliance, and confidentiality requirements. 

2. Cost Efficiency and Predictability

Unlike cloud-based models that charge per GB processed or hosted, LAW offers a fixed-cost licensing structure. This makes budgeting for large or ongoing matters far more predictable which is an important advantage for litigation support teams or government agencies operating under strict budgets. 

3. End-to-End Processing and Imaging

LAW remains one of the most complete on-prem solutions available for both native file processing and document scanning/imaging. From ingestion to production, LAW empowers users to control every stage of the workflow without outsourcing or cloud dependencies. 

4. Seamless Integration with Review Platforms

Processed data from LAW can be easily exported to review platforms like CloudNine Review, combining the best of both worlds: on-prem control during processing, and cloud flexibility for document review. 

5. Proven Reliability

LAW has been a trusted workhorse in the eDiscovery community for decades. Its enduring presence in litigation support environments is a testament to its performance, consistency, and ability to handle massive datasets with precision. 

When On-Premise eDiscovery Makes the Most Sense 

While the cloud offers advantages in scalability and collaboration, many scenarios still call for the stability and independence of on-premise platforms like LAW: 

• High-security investigations or government matters 

• Matters involving data subject to local storage laws 

• Projects requiring rapid turnaround without upload/download delays 

• Organizations seeking long-term cost control and predictable ROI 

• Environments where existing IT infrastructure is already optimized 

In short, on-premise isn’t outdated: it’s strategic and practical. For many teams, LAW bridges the gap between traditional control and modern flexibility, ensuring data stays secure and costs stay manageable. 

The Last of Its Kind But Built for the Future 

CloudNine LAW stands out today as one of the last and only fully on-premise document scanning and data processing platforms in the eDiscovery industry. While others have migrated entirely to the cloud, LAW continues to evolve incorporating modern file type support, performance updates, and integration with hybrid workflows. 

For organizations that can’t, or won’t, compromise on security, control, or cost efficiency, LAW remains a cornerstone technology that continues to deliver real value. 

Conclusion 

As the eDiscovery landscape becomes increasingly cloud-centric, it’s important to remember that choice still matters. CloudNine LAW empowers legal teams and service providers to maintain control of their data, protect sensitive information, and operate on their own terms without the unpredictability of cloud costs or third-party hosting. 

In a world rushing to only offer SaaS, LAW proves that on-premise can still be the smartest move. 

This is Part I of a two part article. Continue reading Part II:

Why On-Premise eDiscovery Platforms Are Important in Modern Legal Discovery

Masters Conference: Seattle, 2025 |  Article by Sheila Sadaghiani, Regional Director of Sales, CloudNine

Speakers:

• Doug Kaminski, Infinnium
• Mike Russell, Expedia Group

Session Abstract:

Let’s face it, most organizations are drowning in data and struggle with gaining control. At the same time, threat actors are targeting those who hold a lot of data and especially sensitive data. Storage used to be cheap, but now we’re seeing vendors in the data ecosystem monetizing that volume to a greater degree. Add the element of GenAI and the data footprint grows exponentially as does the need to control any exposure.  Join us for this important session to learn what you can do to address this growing issue!

Why Information Governance Should Come Before AI in eDiscovery

At the recent Master’s Conference Legal in Seattle, I sat in on a powerful panel discussion about information governance and it really resonated with what I see daily in eDiscovery sales. As an account representative for CloudNine, where we offer CloudNine Review for eDiscovery document review, I often work with corporate legal teams and large law firms who are struggling under the weight of their own data.

One of the panelists, Doug Kaminski, Chief Revenue Officer at Infinnium, shared an important point: organizations are creating and duplicating data faster than they can manage it, and without a strong governance framework, they end up losing control of their information. His insight underscored what I experience firsthand, many clients simply don’t know what data they have, where it’s stored, or how much of it is redundant.

Another panelist, Mike Russell from Expedia Group, expanded on that idea by emphasizing the practical side of governance. He noted that governance isn’t just about meeting compliance obligations, it’s about enabling business agility. As Mike explained, when organizations take the time to understand their data landscape, they’re not just preparing for litigation or audits; they’re improving collaboration, reducing security risk, and setting the stage for smarter decision-making across departments.

Much of this data sits in Microsoft 365, local drives, and shared servers, sometimes duplicated multiple times across custodians. When litigation arises, the result can be overwhelming. I’ve seen organizations collect 10 terabytes of data when the actual relevant set might only be 500 gigabytes to 2 terabytes. That overcollection drives up processing, hosting, and review costs dramatically, all because no one had visibility into the data landscape beforehand.

To put the scope of the problem in perspective, several statistics were mentioned during the panel discussion:

• Over 50% of enterprise data is considered “dark data”, information that organizations store but don’t actively use or even know exists.
• ️ 30% to 50% of stored data in most organizations is duplicated or redundant, increasing costs and risk exposure.
• The average enterprise holds over 10 petabytes (10,000 terabytes) of data, yet less than 10% is typically relevant for eDiscovery or compliance purposes.
• Data storage and management costs rise an estimated 35% year over year when governance is not in place.
• Unstructured data makes up roughly 80–90% of total corporate data, making it the hardest, and most expensive, to manage in litigation.

Doug Kaminski also emphasized that this lack of visibility doesn’t just inflate discovery costs, it creates security vulnerabilities. Disorganized, unstructured data is a prime target for threat actors. When sensitive information is stored haphazardly across systems, it’s not only harder to find for litigation but easier to exploit in a breach.

There’s also a growing misconception that AI can fix these issues. It’s true that AI has tremendous value in accelerating review and surfacing insights, but as Doug noted during the panel, “AI is only as good as the data you feed it.” I couldn’t agree more. If an organization’s data is chaotic and duplicative, AI simply amplifies that noise, leading to higher costs and less reliable results.

That’s why, in my opinion, information governance must come first. Governance creates the structure that makes AI effective. It’s proactive, not reactive. It prevents unnecessary spending, improves security, and lays the foundation for more accurate and efficient discovery when litigation occurs.

AI is an incredible tool, but it’s not the solution to poor governance. Clean, well-managed data allows AI to reach its potential. Without that foundation, even the most advanced technology becomes an expensive workaround.

When you roll these into a financial model, companies that implement governance-first strategies often realize 2× to 3× higher ROI within 12–18 months compared to those with no formal governance.

Putting governance first doubles the organizational ROI by cutting waste, improving compliance, and unlocking automation potential, while ignoring governance leaves money and risk on the table.

The takeaway from the Seattle Master’s Conference was clear: before we can rely on AI to revolutionize eDiscovery, we must first reimagine how we govern data. Information governance isn’t just a compliance initiative; it’s the cornerstone of every successful discovery strategy.

In today’s litigation and investigation landscape, data volumes and communication channels continue to multiply. From emails and chat platforms to mobile data and collaboration tools, legal teams face an overwhelming challenge: identifying what matters most, as early as possible. The sooner counsel can assess case merit and key issues, the better equipped they are to shape strategy, evaluate risk, and control costs.

That’s where artificial intelligence (AI) in investigations and eDiscovery review comes in.

Early Case Assessment: Finding the Signal in the Noise

Traditional early case assessment (ECA) often required broad culling strategies, search term testing, and manual review of sample sets. While useful, those methods can be time-consuming and costly, especially when data sets are massive.

AI-driven review tools like generative AI-powered analysis, allow teams to:

• Quickly surface key evidence: AI learns from reviewer input, identifying documents most likely to be relevant far faster than linear review.
• Spot patterns and themes: Similar to Technology Assisted Review (TAR) and other workflows, AI can cluster related documents, highlight communication spikes, and uncover custodians or topics of interest that may not appear in keyword lists. AI is now the fastest way to organize and find patterns in your data, much more efficiently and effectively than other methods.
• Assess case merit earlier: With faster access to the “hot” documents, legal teams can make informed decisions on settlement, litigation strategy, or resource allocation at the outset.

Cutting Downstream Review Costs

The benefits of AI extend well beyond ECA. By embedding AI throughout the review workflow, organizations can dramatically reduce downstream costs, which often make up the largest portion of discovery spend.

• Smarter prioritization: AI identifies relevant material faster, ensuring that reviewers spend time where it matters most and can categorize data by issues or topics.
• Consistent coding: AI maintains coding consistency across large reviewer teams, across every issue, by suggesting categorizations based on your specific instruction. It applies that instruction, consistently across every document, every time.
• Eliminating redundancies: AI can detect near-duplicates, email threading, and conversation reconstruction, allowing reviewers to avoid re-reading similar documents.
• Reducing review volumes: Accurately identifying irrelevant material and excluding those up-front results in fewer documents remaining in the costly final stages of review. Lower volumes equal lower costs.

Building Confidence with Defensibility

One of the biggest questions around AI in eDiscovery has always been defensibility. Many of the protocols for AI review are identical to those for TAR related projects and are already familiar to those in litigation. Documented protocols, validation sampling, and transparent reporting ensure that AI-powered review stands up to scrutiny while driving efficiency. Additional features like document summarization and relevancy explanation help confirm each individual coding classification.

A Smarter Path Forward

For legal teams balancing speed, accuracy, and cost, AI is no longer optional it’s becoming essential for cases of ALL sizes. Leveraging AI during review not only accelerates the path to critical evidence and early case insight, but also dramatically reduces the burden of downstream review.

The result?

• Faster decisions on case strategy.
• Lower overall discovery costs.
• Greater confidence in outcomes.

In an era of ever-expanding data, those who integrate AI into their review workflows will be best positioned to gain the competitive advantage in litigation and investigations and isn’t limited to large cases as the economics of the technology and services align with cases of all sizes.

Legal teams today face increasingly complex data from emails and documents to mobile and collaboration platforms. While many vendors offer all-in-one eDiscovery solutions, these often sacrifice flexibility and performance for convenience.

That’s where CloudNine and eDiscovery AI stand out.

CloudNine delivers fast, scalable, and defensible review and production across diverse data types. eDiscovery AI brings cutting-edge analytics and AI-powered Early Case Assessment (ECA), helping teams gain clarity faster and with greater accuracy.

Together, we offer:

• Specialized excellence at each stage of the eDiscovery process
• Flexible workflows that adapt to your case needs
• Cost efficiency by paying only for what you use
• Scalability to handle data growth without overpaying
• Future-readiness with faster innovation and support for emerging data types

Instead of being locked into a rigid platform, legal teams get the freedom to choose, integrate, and evolve.

Want to see how this partnership transforms your eDiscovery outcomes? Read the full article from eDiscovery AI:

Why CloudNine and eDiscovery AI Deliver Better ECA, Analysis, Review and Production than “All-in-One” Platforms

Masters Conference: Philadelphia, 2025 |  Article by Rick Clark

The 2025 Masters Conference in Philadelphia kicked off with a powerhouse panel tackling one of the most anticipated topics in the industry: “The State of eDiscovery: Case Law and Hot Topics.” Moderated by Nicole Marie Gill of CODISCOVR, the session brought together thought leaders Nicholas Berenato (CODISCOVR), Doug Austin (eDiscovery Today), and Jerry Bui (Purpose Legal) to explore recent case law shaping discovery practice and emerging trends redefining how organizations manage modern data. 

From possession, custody, and control disputes to the challenges of deepfake evidence and AI-generated content, the discussion offered a timely look at how courts and practitioners are adapting to rapid technological change. 

Possession, Custody, and Control: The Continuing Challenge 

Several recent rulings highlighted the nuances of control over electronically stored information (ESI), especially as new data types proliferate. 

• Vaughn v. Solera Holdings addressed the discoverability of Slack messages. Because the company’s Slack configuration lacked an export license, the court ruled that Solera wasn’t obligated to produce those messages. 

• Bui noted that this decision underscores the need for litigation-ready platform configurations, adding that he was surprised by the outcome. 

• Austin observed that the requesting party missed an opportunity to argue the opposing side’s capability to obtain that data. 

• In Allergan Inc. v. Revance Therapeutics, a dispute over mobile device data raised questions about possession and control in a BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) environment. 

• Berenato emphasized that organizations should explicitly address collection rights in their BYOD policies while respecting employee privacy. 

• Austin added that corporations are increasingly avoiding mobile device discovery which is a trend he expects to continue as many corporate communications are being advised in policies to avoid such communications via text or mobile chat apps that are non-sanctioned by the organization. 

Hyperlinked Files, Attachments, and Accessibility 

Cases such as Hubbard v. Crow and Young v. Salesforce, Inc. highlighted the growing complexity around hyperlinked documents and data accessibility. 

In Hubbard, the plaintiffs were sanctioned when they couldn’t produce a four-minute segment of a podcast linked via a broken hyperlink. 

• Bui pointed out that many organizations rely on platforms that maintain content access, and hyperlinks should ideally lead to the underlying documents. 

• Austin noted the importance of data archiving practices that preserve contemporaneous versions, including metadata that shows who edited what, and when. 

ESI Protocols and Judicial Oversight 

In Hall v. Warren, when the parties couldn’t agree on ESI protocols, the judge imposed one instead. The panel agreed that this case reinforces the need for collaboration and early agreement on discovery protocols to avoid court intervention. 

Deepfakes: The Next Frontier of Evidentiary Risk 

A standout discussion centered on Mendones v. Cushman & Wakefield Inc., where much of the evidence turned out to be deepfake video content. 

• Bui described how poor lip-syncing and mismatched audio made the deepfakes obvious this time. But he cautioned that synthetic media is improving quickly, and future cases may be far harder to detect and require experts to help validate. 

Emerging Technologies and the Information Governance Connection 

Turning to the “left side” of the EDRM, Gill asked how emerging technologies are influencing information governance (IG) and discovery readiness. 

• Berenato stressed the need for AI frameworks, governance training, and data minimization strategies to manage risk. 

• Bui highlighted the value of preservation-in-place strategies and the importance of involving corporate IT early, leveraging tools like Microsoft 365 and Purview to make IG data more searchable. 

• Austin cautioned that as data organization shifts away from solely custodians, in-place preservation can become problematic, expanding the scope of legal holds. 

Chat, Collaboration Apps, and Generative AI Data 

When the conversation turned to Slack, Teams, and AI-enabled platforms, Bui noted the emergence of a “third category” that is AI-generated data created by digital agents, such as Microsoft Co-Pilot.
He suggested that metadata models may need to evolve to include a new “author” field identifying AI agents. 

Austin added that while technology isn’t perfect, consistent processes and defensible procedures remain key to managing risk as AI becomes embedded in workflows. 

Strategies for Cost, Risk, and Compliance 

Across the panel, a common theme emerged: less data equals less risk. 

• Berenato urged organizations to minimize retained data to only what’s necessary for business or legal reasons. 

• Bui noted that Microsoft 365’s labeling and categorization features can simplify IG planning and retention. 

What’s Next for eDiscovery? 

Looking ahead, the panelists agreed that privacy, AI, and cross-border data will drive the next phase of eDiscovery transformation. 

• Berenato predicted that diverging state privacy laws will complicate compliance but noted that technology is evolving to keep pace. 

• Bui highlighted ongoing tensions between privacy and forensic collection, especially in global matters. 

• Austin forecast that linear review is sunsetting faster than expected as AI accelerates review workflows. He also referenced the upcoming EDRM 2.0 model, which aims to modernize frameworks for modern data types. 

• Bui closed by reminding practitioners that the pace of change demands continuous learning, as data types, threats, and technologies evolve faster than ever before. 

Key Takeaways 

From Slack messages and mobile data to deepfakes and generative AI, today’s eDiscovery landscape is expanding beyond the traditional boundaries of ESI. This session underscored that litigation readiness now depends on proactive governance, defensible processes, and a firm grasp of emerging technologies. 

As Austin aptly summarized: “We’re in a modern data era and the types of data we haven’t even anticipated yet will soon be part of discovery.” 

Masters Conference: NYC, 2025 |  Article by Rick Clark

At the 2025 Masters Conference in New York City, one panel dug deep into one of the most pressing issues in modern litigation and investigations: mobile data overload. In the session titled “The Mobile Data Deluge: How to Tackle it for eDiscovery,” a powerhouse panel of experts from Cellebrite, CloudNine, and Sandline Global shared strategies for managing the growing complexity of data in digital investigations and legal discovery.

Panelists:

• Eric Seggebruch, Account Executive, Cellebrite Enterprise Solutions
• Rick Clark, VP of Strategic Partnerships and Marketing, CloudNine
• Rob Fried, SVP, Forensics & Investigation, Sandline Global
• Andy Jacobs, Solutions Engineer, Cellebrite Enterprise Solutions

Together, they brought a mix of field expertise and technical insight, offering a roadmap for legal teams grappling with the explosion of mobile and messaging data.

Data is Everywhere And It’s Getting Heavier

The numbers tell the story:

• 97% of eDiscovery cases now include at least one mobile device
• The average investigation involves 275 GB of data
• Many cases start with at least five custodians
• Growing use of social media, messaging apps, and BYOD environments further expands the digital evidence footprint

The trend is clear: mobile data isn’t just part of an investigation; it’s often the core of the case.

The Tangled Web of Mobile Messaging

Gone are the days of simple SMS and email discovery. Today’s legal teams must sift through a complex web of communications from apps like:

• WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Viber, Wire
• iOS and Android devices
• Cloud storage platforms
• Enterprise messaging apps like Slack and Teams

Andy Jacobs emphasized the need to understand the types of collections available from logical and advanced logical to full file system acquisitions and what each can reveal. “It may be not just about extracting messages,” he explained. “It’s about finding deleted data, encryption keys, application metadata, and cross-platform context.”

Getting to the Truth with Smart Tools

The panel encouraged a toolkit mindset which is one that equips legal professionals with versatile options to handle diverse devices and apps.

Key insights included:

• Full file system collections can uncover data missed by surface-level scans
• Database and keychain access is essential for encrypted apps
• Automation can reduce examination time without compromising defensibility
• Parsed and unparsed data review enables deeper understanding of how, when, and where communications occurred

Rick Clark emphasized the importance of integrating mobile data into the broader review ecosystem, noting that tools like CloudNine support a seamless flow from mobile collection to hosted review and analytics.

Modern Challenges Require Modern Collaboration

Rob Fried reminded attendees that no single approach works for every matter. “You need to meet your custodians where they are,” he said, pointing to the importance of hybrid collection capabilities that include cloud-based platforms, remote devices, and even deleted or hidden data.

Whether the investigation is rooted in financial fraud, corporate disputes, or regulatory audits, success requires a balance of technical skill, strategic thinking, and client communication.

Revolutionizing eDiscovery Workflows

The session concluded with a call to reimagine the traditional eDiscovery model:

1. Mobile Device Collection – Go beyond email and docs; get the full story
2. Seamless Processing – Automate and standardize for speed and accuracy
3. Streamlined Review – Centralize diverse data types into a unified platform
4. Powerful Insights – Use visual analytics and filtering to spotlight what matters

This modern workflow not only reduces time to resolution, but also enhances transparency, compliance, and defensibility in court.

Final Thoughts: Embrace the Deluge, Don’t Drown in It

The explosion of mobile data in legal matters isn’t a crisis, it’s an opportunity. With the right tools, strategies, and collaboration between forensic experts and legal teams, organizations can cut through the noise, focus on what matters, and tell the real story behind the data.

As Eric Seggebruch said during the panel, “It’s not just about collecting data anymore, it’s about collecting the right data, in the right way, and delivering it in time to make a difference.”

Masters Conference: NYC, 2025 |  Article by Rick Clark

At The Masters Conference NYC, held July 22–23, 2025, legal professionals, investigators, and technologists gathered at Morgan Lewis to share not only the promise of AI but also its limitations. One standout session, “From the Frontlines of Resolving Disputes: Bringing the Right Combination of AI (and Not AI) Tools,” delivered just that: real-world stories from financial disputes, fraud investigations, and litigation matters where the right mix of human expertise and tech-savvy strategy made all the difference.

Moderated by seasoned veterans with experience discussing AI with clients, the panel featured:

• Mike Gaudet – Managing Director, J.S. Held
• Ken Feinstein – Senior Managing Director, J.S. Held
• Arnold Blair – Discovery Counsel, MoloLamken
• David Carney – Partner, Robinson+Cole

Their message was clear: there is no silver bullet to addressing eDiscovery issues.  Success often comes from striking a balanced approach between traditional methods and modern tools, including AI-powered tools

The Data Have Changed. Have You?

“Five years ago, the conversation was: Should we get the phones and chats? Now it’s: We always get the phones and chats,” said Mike Gaudet, summarizing the evolution of data sources in disputes.

Arnold Blair noted that many still forget that short message communications, including texts and messaging apps are discoverable, they  often reveal more candid insights than formal emails. “People are more cavalier in what they say, and that makes it a goldmine for investigators if you can afford to get to it.” The cost and time required to sift through hours of “24-hour document” style reviews have created new pressure on teams to be smarter in how they collect and analyze modern communications.

Ken Feinstein emphasized that while the foundational steps of discovery (identification, collection, review) have not changed, how we interact with the data has. “Visualization tools and AI-assisted platforms now help teams make sense of communication patterns, transaction timelines, and relationships across structured and unstructured data.”

AI Is a Tool. Not the Answer

Throughout the session, panelists reiterated: AI should augment human decision-making, not replace it.

David Carney offered a reality check for those eager to deploy emerging tech: “It starts with the client. What’s their comfort level with innovation? Some are eager to experiment; others are skeptical, especially with riskier tech like generative AI.” He cited “hallucinations” in legal research which is false or fabricated cases from tools like ChatGPT as a cautionary tale. Validation, he stressed, must be baked into every AI-enabled workflow.

Arnold Blair added that the type of case should be a factor to consider what technology to use . A construction litigation case doesn’t need the same toolkit as a high-profile healthcare fraud matter. Flexibility and creativity are essential.

Navigating the Tech Landscape: Practical Considerations

Choosing the right approach means balancing multiple factors:

• Suitability and defensibility of the technology
• Client comfort level with AI or advanced platforms
• Timeline and budget constraints
• Risks related to data privacy, accuracy, and trust
• Ongoing need for human oversight

Carney described implementing some AI tools, particularly those that help with data interaction and visualization, as a way to “dip your toe in the water.”. These tools create a technology-assisted, human-led review model, helping teams get to the truth faster and with better precision.

The Role of AI in Investigations and Disputes

Ken Feinstein focused on one of AI’s most valuable applications: normalizing semi-structured data into analyzable formats. When messages, emails, transactions, and timelines are layered into a cohesive dataset, patterns emerge and stories are revealed.

“Every matter is different,” Feinstein said, “so your approach needs to be innovative and case-specific.” He encouraged professionals to explore hybrid models and layered approaches, where AI enhances, but doesn’t overtake, traditional methodologies.

Mike Gaudet added that the future lies in layered AI that adapts to complex cases with real-time inputs and cross-data references. In litigation involving healthcare mergers or construction disputes, layered approaches allow investigators to correlate internal messages with financial triggers, project delays, or compliance gaps.

Trends on the Horizon

The panel also spotlighted key litigation technology trends:

• Technology is moving further upstream – directly behind the client’s firewall
• Faster adoption rates as AI becomes part of broader corporate strategies
• A surge in irrelevant data means culling tools must evolve rapidly
• Data reviewed all together as a stream, not just in siloed document batches
• Human focus is shifting to more strategic and interpretive tasks

According to Carney, clients are warming up to these changes especially when a previous success story or proof of concept is available. “If we’ve used it before in a similar case and it worked, that helps get buy-in.”

Conclusion: The Truth Takes a Team; Both Human and Machine

In the end, this session from The Masters Conference reminded attendees that there’s no shortcut to the truth in legal disputes. AI and advanced tools are incredibly powerful allies, but they’re not miracle workers. Thoughtful professionals, strategic planning, and contextual judgment remain irreplaceable.

Every case demands its own approach. Sometimes that means deploying cutting-edge AI tools. Other times, it’s about asking the right questions, using visualization platforms, and staying grounded in defensible, client-focused strategies.

Because whether it’s AI, chat messages, financial records, or family law disputes, the mission remains the same: Find the truth. Tell the story. Defend the process.