Top Considerations When Building BYOD Policies


Vikas_PallIn a recent article, my Kroll Ontrack colleague Vikas Pall wrote about the growing concerns over bring your own device (BYOD) policies. Today’s employees integrate their personal and professional lives, and the use of personal devices for day-to-day employment duties has become ubiquitous. The days of doubling up on devices—one personal, one professional—are over, with BYOD policies emerging as the most enticing option for employees and companies.


While there are many advantages to BYOD, taking on the ambiguities and complications that can come with having employees bring their own devices to work can be a risky move if an organization fails to put a well-planned policy in place.  In his article in ILTA’s Peer to Peer magazine, Vikas outlines the top things to consider when building a BYOD policy.

#1: Assess

Crafting a well thought out BYOD policy is the key to fully utilizing its benefits, but a perfectly planned policy does not appear overnight. A policy must be effective, relatively simple and easy to follow for end users and the IT department. Communication across departments is the best way to make sure all bases are covered.

#2: Plan

Once the broad framework is in place, it is time to finalize the details of the policy. From Android to Apple phones to tablets and wearables, defining exactly what is meant by “bring your own device” is critical. Companies should be device-specific, or limit the devices, and establish a clear service policy for the list of approved BYOD devices. In the midst of planning the functional aspects of a policy, it is equally important to address employee exit strategies. BYOD policies should reference the company’s separated employee process and vice versa.

#3: Implement

To prevent data breaches or corporate hacks, specify what kinds of corporate data may be accessed on which devices and implement mobile device, data and app security measures in your BYOD policy to protect company data and confidentiality. BYOD policies should also touch on preservation and discovery in litigation. Companies can get ahead of failed preservation efforts by adding BYOD data to their ESI data maps and issuing legal hold notices to address what content must be preserved.

#4: Iterate

Companies should regularly audit the effectiveness of their BYOD policy. Look at what new technologies are available and whether they should be supported. Review the current policy points to see if anything wasn’t adopted or could be improved. BYOD polices will continue to evolve with technology and the workforce.

Be sure to read the full article, From Blurred to Secured: Four Steps to a Better BYOD Policy, for a more in-depth analysis of best practices for bring your own device policies.

#LTNY16: That’s a Wrap!


Whew! After three electrifying (and tiring) days, Legal Tech New York 2016 is in the books!

For those of you that experienced the show first-hand, we don’t have to tell you that this year’s conference was another incredible year for networking, new technology, neuron-stimulating educational sessions and nights out on the town. In the event you hung back and enjoyed a productive week in the office, here’s a quick #LTNY16 wrap-up.


With more than 60 educational sessions, there was no shortage of top-notch speakers, interesting commentary and hot-topics.  Here were the top 5 themes:

  1. Predictive Coding
  2. FRCP Amendments
  3. Safe Harbor
  4. Information Governance
  5. Office365 and the Cloud

Also, Kroll Ontrack and the EDRM co-sponsored a panel “25 Ediscovery Warnings in 75 Minutes”, which was standing room only and featured more speakers than any other session!


Legal Tech sponsored several outstanding keynote speakers and panels.  Topics included:

  • Cybersecurity
  • Analytics, AI & Big Data
  • Technology in the Courtroom


In addition to good food and fine drinks that are native to New York City, there were several lively vendor parties (kudos to kCura!). Legal Tech also sponsored two rock concerts inside the Hilton, with proceeds benefiting two great causes.  If the parties were not enough, there were some great interactive booths on the exhibitor floor — one booth even had puppies!

See you at Legal Tech West Coast in San Francisco in June 13-14, 2016!

January 2016 Ediscovery Case Summaries

Case Law Picture

Court Issues Sanctions for Manipulation of Email Evidence, Addresses New FRCP 37(e)
CAT3 v. Black Lineage, 2016 WL 154116 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 12, 2016)

Court Denies Motion to Compel Under newly Amended FRCP 26(b)(1)
Gilead Sciences v. Merck, 2016 WL 146574 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 13, 2016)

Court Applies New FRCP 26, Awards Production of Documents
Carr v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2015 WL 8010920 (N.D. Tex. Dec. 7, 2015)

Plaintiff Lacks Control of Employees’ Personal Accounts, Motion to Compel Denied
Matthew Enter v. Chrysler Grp., 2015 WL 8482256 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2015)

Government Can Fail to Preserve Too, Court Awards Sanctions
United States v. Vaughn, 2015 WL 6948577 (D. N.J. Nov. 10, 2015)

Are You Ready for LegalTech 2016?


Who’s ready for LegalTech 2016? We’re ready for LegalTech 2016! After months of prep work, the show is about to start. At Kroll Ontrack, ediscovery is everywhere…

Educational Sessions

There’s a lot to see and do at LegalTech. To help you out, we’ve put together a list of educational sessions you simply can’t miss:

The Science of Predictive Coding 10:30 – 11:45 AM on Wednesday, February 3
Listen to this panel of predictive coding gurus and veterans. Anyone who uses – or is thinking about using – predictive coding will benefit from this.

Turn on the Lights in a Dark [Data] Room 2:00 – 3:15 PM on Wednesday, February 3
An interactive session that will teach you what ‘dark data’ is and how you can use it to your organization’s benefit without breaking the bank.

25 Ediscovery Warnings in 75 Minutes 3:45 – 5:00 PM on Wednesday, February 3
Join ediscovery experts in a fast-paced series of live stories from audience members who will share their stories and tips for common problems that stump litigation teams.

Coffee Talks

Come for the coffee – stay for the talk.

Spend 15 minutes with ediscovery experts from the US and EU to talk about recent Safe Harbor developments. Tuesday, February 2 at 1:30 and 3:30 PM at booth #216.

Significant FRCP amendments became effective December 1, 2015. Join expert Tom Allman to get up to speed. Wednesday, February 3 at 1:30 and 3:30 PM at booth #216.

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo with Kroll Ontrack to see our ediscovery solutions at work. This year’s offerings include:

Relativity by Kroll Ontrack – As a Relativity Best in Service Partner and winner of Best Service Provider Solution at Relativity Fest 2015, Kroll Ontrack offers customized workflows, nearline technology, and assisted redaction tools. Review – With Review, you can conduct early data assessment, analysis, review and production within a single platform. Give your teams unprecedented control to manage data through nearline and predictive coding technologies. Manage – A management tool that allows you to view and manage all ediscovery projects as a portfolio from any device. Interactive dashboards, real time metrics, data volumes, forecasting and trends.

Find more information about what Kroll Ontrack will be doing this year (prizes, exhibit hours, etc.) at our LTNY 2016 page.

Our Twitter account will be the place to go if you need any information during the show. Be sure to follow us for updates – and Tweet at us. See you next week!

Guest Blog: Turning on the Lights in a Dark (Data) Room


This is a guest blog written by Tom Barce.

t_barce2015Tom Barce ( is the Director of Consulting Services for Kroll Ontrack. Mr. Barce brings over 18 years of experience in directing information management, electronic discovery and litigation support initiatives. He is accustomed to delivering strategic vision, consultative services and project management expertise. He has extensive experience in responding to complex electronic discovery demands in numerous litigation and regulatory matters. Through his experience and vision, he strives to continually elevate our community to higher state of “information intelligence.”

Tom recently spoke on the topic of dark data at the monthly meeting of the ARMA Metro NYC Chapter.

Turning on the Lights in a Dark (Data) Room

At breakneck speed, businesses and individuals are amassing huge volumes of disparate and obsolete data—data that has long gone “dark” within an organization.

Dark data is the neglected data accumulated by an organization during regular business activities—the aging information, untouched archives, ancient web log files, old records of email correspondence. This data is intermingled with highly valuable and sometimes sensitive business information, too.  It usually holds little value on its own and for many organizations it is too costly for an organization to access, compile, analyze and manage the data’s retention. For many organizations, it seems easiest to allow the data to amass in the shadowy corner of their IT infrastructure. However, when corporations shine a light on the dark data abyss, unused data can be very illuminating.

Double Check and Utilize Dark Data to Your Advantage

At its core, dark data can present significant risk. Most legal professionals who have responded to a legal or regulatory action have succumbed to the costly pains of trudging through small percentages of antiquated data amongst huge data stores. Notwithstanding such significant risks, dark data presents noteworthy opportunity costs for organizations. For example, reports run from accounting systems about company transactions alone may seem like benign business activity. But what if those reports were emailed to a Gmail account, downloaded to a USB drive or uploaded to a website?  When sources of transactional data like file names, network activity, local computer access, or web history are cross referenced, powerful corollaries can be derived to protect your organization.  While this type of intelligence might not lead to an earth shattering money laundering investigation, it does not hurt to double check activity that might seem questionable. Recognizing how to utilize dark data can allow an organization to prevent, detect and defend against internal and external threats, from spotting internal fraud to harnessing information and gaining an advantage in the market.

Growing contingents of businesses are leveraging great information for marketing and sales. But how many are using data to mitigate or detect risk?  While some organizations are letting their data gather dust in the dark, others have focused an information governance spotlight on their once-dark data to extrapolate value from overlooked data and uncovering substantial intelligence. For example, by monitoring file downloads to USB connected devices, an organization can prevent losing sensitive data. Conversely, corporations that forgo tapping into unused data may be sacrificing value and risk becoming less efficient and relevant than their competitors.

First Steps to Shining the Light on Dark Data

Unfortunately, shining the light on dark data is not as simple as flipping a switch. A few steps are essential to capitalizing on dark data. First, begin by prioritizing business concerns and risks to establish a starting point for the projects to follow. Next, aim for one project per period (quarterly, semi-annually or yearly) to focus on your concerns and the data you can use to manage them. Leverage people, processes and technology, and understand how to profile the data that is usable to create actionable business and legal intelligence.  Identify easy wins when possible, especially if low cost solutions can securely advance high risk objectives.  Of course, document the process should litigation ever loom on the horizon.

There isn’t a single existing technology solution today that can thoroughly illuminate all the dark data and automatically harvest its value.  That said, with careful forethought and perseverance, corporations can make unwieldy dark data far more comprehendible, less risky and just a little brighter.

It’s Your Turn! Vote Today for the National Law Journal’s ‘Best of 2016’

Vote for Kroll Ontrack

The polls are open, and it’s awards season. Whatever your persuasion, it’s your turn to vote. The National Law Journal recently announced the finalists for its ‘Best of 2016,’ and Kroll Ontrack is proud to be nominated in NINE categories!

  • Best end-to-end litigation consulting firm
  • Best end-to-end ediscovery provider
  • Best technology assisted review ediscovery solution
  • Best data and technology management ediscovery provider
  • Best data recovery solution provider
  • Best managed document review services
  • Best managed ediscovery and litigation support services provider
  • Best online review platform
  • Best case management software

From now until Friday, February 5, you can vote in the annual reader’s choice survey. This is your chance to rate the products and services you’ve been using in litigation. And it’s an opportunity for those of us in the industry to receive valuable feedback.

While you don’t have to answer every question, we greatly appreciate your support and your feedback – thank you for taking the time!

It’s time to vote.

The Updated Pulse Benchmarks Have Arrived


Don’t miss a beat; the updated Pulse Benchmarks have arrived! Kroll Ontrack’s Pulse keeps track of changes in the ediscovery market. The Pulse Benchmarks provide real-time data that can help practitioners identify ways to cut time and costs on their ediscovery projects. Here are some of the highlights from the recent December 2015 update.

Source Data is on the Rise as Big Cases Get Bigger

The past two years have seen an increase in the average number of gigabytes collected prior to filtering and processing per project. Even though parties are collecting data more diligently and custodian counts per matter continue to decline, big data is driving up data volumes per custodian, resulting in increased data volumes per case.

Ratio of Email to Loose Files Stabilizes

While the volume of unstructured data and the complexity of data stores proliferate, email still remains the dominant data form for ediscovery. After a decline in 2013, the percentage of email processed rose to previously recorded levels in the 2014 data.

Better Technology Equals Fewer Reviewers on Every Project

There is simply no escaping the old adage that time is money when it comes to ediscovery—especially when it comes to document review. The empowering impact of modern filtering and review technologies, like predictive coding, is likely a significant driving force behind this trend of fewer reviewers per project.

The full Pulse Report is now available, and includes more highlighted metrics so you can keep up-to-the-minute with the latest ediscovery trends.

We Want to Hear from you! Submit your Stories for Legaltech New York


It’s been said that we learn a lot from our mistakes. While that’s true, it’s definitely a lot easier to learn from the mistakes of others! What better way to start the new year than to hear about real-world examples of current ediscovery gotchas?

Legaltech New York

EDRM and Kroll Ontrack are partnering to host an educational session at Legaltech New York, “25 eDiscovery Warnings in 75 Minutes,” that will give 12 people the chance to present two quick topics around current gotchas in ediscovery. George Socha, EDRM co-founder and president of Socha Consulting, will join Josh Zylbershlag, vice president of Kroll Ontrack, to moderate a fast-paced series of live stories from audience members, who will give three-minute examples from their own experiences of ediscovery situations gone wrong, explain how the issue was ultimately resolved and share their lessons learned.

“The session will offer 25 opportunities to learn from the mistakes of others – an educational and entertaining way to increase one’s own success rate,” says Socha. “We originally presented this session format at ILTACON 2015 with great success, and I look forward to digging into the new challenges and resolutions shared by Legaltech New York participants.

Sign Up!

Legaltech New York participants interested in sharing their stories during this session are encouraged to submit their ideas by January 8, 2016. Selected speakers will have six minutes – three minutes per topic – to share your gotchas with the audience. If you prefer not to speak, but have a great idea for a gotcha, send it our way. You’ll get the credit without the pressure. Each topic should describe a gotcha and offer a solution.

The session will be held on Wednesday, February 3, from 3:45 to 5:00pm ET.

December 2015 Ediscovery Case Summaries

Case Law Picture

Court Rejects Plaintiff’s Requested Production Format in Favor of Format Containing Metadata                                                                                                     Feist v. Paxfire, Inc., 2015 WL 6456710 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 26, 2015)

Appellate Court Affirms Sanctions in Light of “Delay Tactics” and Spoliation                                                                                                                           Long Bay Management Co. v. Haese, 2015 WL 7213811 (Mass. App. Ct. Nov. 17, 2015)

Court Finds Sanctions Inappropriate Following Plaintiff’s Failure to Establish Prejudice                                                                                                     West v. Talton, 2015 WL 6675565 (M.D. Ga. Nov. 2, 2015)

Court Utilizes “Best Judgment” in Light of Limited Information                 Oracle v. Google, 2015 WL 7775243 (N.D. Ca. Dec. 3, 2015)

Court Excludes Expert Testimony Weakened by Plaintiff’s Own Spoliation Bruno v. Bozzuto’s, 2015 WL 7294464 (M.D. Pa. Nov. 19, 2015)


Year in Review: Top Ediscovery Cases of 2015


As another year wraps up, we look forward to the holidays and the promise of a new year. There is no better time to remember the highlights of ediscovery case law in 2015. Duty to preserve, emphasis on proportionality and reasonable form of production dominated this year’s ediscovery judicial opinions as courts prepared for the amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to take effect December 1, 2015.

Beyond the domination of preservation, proportionality and production, Kroll Ontrack’s analysis of 55 significant state and federal ediscovery opinions led to the classification of 5 major categories that arose most commonly in 2015 ediscovery case law. These significant cases are summarized in Kroll Ontrack’s guide, Top Ediscovery Cases of 2015. This guide includes the following topics and cases:

35 percent of opinions dealt with disputes over production and the methods used.

  • Webb v. Ethicon Endo-Surgery, 2015 WL 317215 (D. Minn. Jan. 26, 2015)
  • Wilson v. Conair Corp., 2015 WL 1994270 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 30, 2015)

20 percent of opinions focused on preservation and spoliation, including when the duty to preserve is triggered.

  • HM Electronics, Inc. v. R.F. Technologies, Inc., 2015 WL 4714908 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2015)
  • Fidelity Nat. Ins. Co. v. Captiva Lake Invs., 2015 WL 94560 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 7, 2015)
  • Kan-Di-Ki, LLC v. Suer, 2015 WL 4503210 (Del. Ch. July 22, 2015)

16 percent of opinions addressed cost considerations, such as cost shifting and taxation of costs.

  • Comprehensive Addiction Treatment Ctr. v. Leslea, 2015 WL 638198 (D. Co. Feb. 13, 2015)
  • Colosi v. Jones Lang LaSalle Americas, Inc., 2015 WL 1186765 (6th Cir. Mar. 17, 2015)
  • Hanwha Azdel, Inc. v. C&D Zodiac, Inc., 2015 WL 1417058 (W.D. Va. Mar. 27, 2015)

16 percent of opinions discussed procedural issues, such as search and predictive coding protocols, cooperation and privilege.

  • Rio Tinto PLC v. Vale S.A., 2015 WL 872294 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2015)

13 percent of opinions issued orders regarding sanctions for spoliation or failure to produce.

  • Parsi v. Daioleslam, 2015 WL 525146 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 10, 2015)

Looking for more? Check out our Top Ediscovery Cases of 2015 guide to review these significant ediscovery cases.  Happy New Year!