All posts in Document Review

TAR: Building a Better Playlist

“Sometimes it seems as if our Pandora and Netflix accounts know us better than we know ourselves, and can build a better play list…”

Brett M. Anders, Jackson Lewis

In a recent article in Today’s General Counsel, Brett M. Anders of Jackson Lewis and my Kroll Ontrack colleague Rick Anderson, seek to debunk the misconception that human lawyers alone can build a better playlist when it comes to legal document review.

Human Review Is Not the Gold Standard

Practitioners shy away from predictive coding and technology assisted review (TAR) in part because of the myth that human review is superior to that done by a computer. However, this is not the case. Humans can be inaccurate: relevant documents can be missed and accuracy suffers. This position has been verified by studies and is generally accepted by the judiciary. The use of TAR has received much support from the courts in the cases where it has been an issue. However, at this point, no court has gone so far as to mandate the use of TAR.

Rick Anderson, Kroll Ontrack

Using Technology Assisted Review in Litigation

As of now, several judicial opinions have surfaced regarding the use of TAR. As noted above, the courts have supported it as a cost effective method for conducting discovery. The standard for discovery responses is “reasonable and proportional to the matter,” not perfection. Therefore, the accuracy offered by the use of TAR satisfies the standard for discovery production.

Speaking of proportionality, using TAR can place a party in a better position to make an argument about proportionality when litigation costs become too high. Because TAR prioritizes which documents are most likely to be relevant, a party who makes its way through the documents with the highest relevance has a basis to argue that additional discovery would not be “proportional to the needs of the case.”

Advantages of Using TAR

As discussed by Anders and Anderson, despite the apprehension to utilize this technology in the legal community, the fact remains that TAR has many advantages.

TAR costs a fraction of the expense it would take to review documents manually
TAR is typically faster than traditional document review, while also more accurate
Courts have approved the use of TAR; parties no longer need to worry about being the first to use this technology in a case
Courts are encouraging its use, while respecting the party’s wish to keep its seed set (used to train predictive coding technology) confidential

For more information on TAR, and how to utilize its benefits in litigation, be sure to read the full article, “Building a Better Play List with Technology-Assisted Review.”

Fall is the Time for Fests!

by Thought Leadership Team on October 3, 2016 in Document Review, Events with Comments Off

The chill in the air, the pumpkin spice lattes and the plethora of fests mean only one thing: fall has arrived. Fall is the time of year for all things “fest,” as Oktoberfests, Harvest Fests, Apple Fests and more fill our calendars. For the ediscovery community, Relativity Fest is another reason to celebrate this time of year.

The Ediscovery Fest of the Year

Relativity Fest is a greatly anticipated event in the ediscovery community and this year it kicks off in Chicago on Sunday night, October 9.

Kroll Ontrack will be there en masse. We are excited to once again send a contingent of people to brush up on their RCEs (Relativity Continuing Education credits). And several of Kroll Ontrack experts will speak at these sessions, providing a unique opportunity to share their experiences:

More Reasons to Celebrate: Chicago Review Center & Corporate Legal Projects

It wouldn’t be Fest without a party! Some of the most extravagant parties are hosted by kCura, but Kroll Ontrack has its own reason to celebrate in Chicago, adding to the fun by hosting a pre-party happy hour on Monday the 10th.

Kroll Ontrack is celebrating the launch of its new Corporate Legal Projects offering. From time to time, a transaction, merger, or regulatory change may require that a modification be made to a body of corporate contracts. This change often involves collection, extraction, analysis, disposition and repapering of contracts or other corporate documents. Kroll Ontrack understands that these complex legal projects are better managed by process experts – experienced professionals who take a methodical, defined approach to contract review. This is the foundation for our Corporate Legal Projects solution.

Also, recently, Kroll Ontrack opened a new document review center in Chicago to streamline the contract review and document review processes. The new Chicago center, which joins several other Kroll Ontrack review centers around the world, contains:

12,800 sq. ft. – ready to be deployed for your next review project;
Space for 130+ reviewers;
Three conference rooms for review training; and
Offices for visiting attorneys and clients.

There is no better time to celebrate these new offerings than with a party at Relativity Fest. After a long day of keynotes, workshops and breakout sessions, you’re going to want a drink and some food before you head out to kCura’s evening bash. We’ll have it all at the 720 South Bar & Grill (in the Hilton lobby) on Monday, October 10 from 5:30 – 7:30 PM. If you are attending Relativity Fest, stop by and celebrate with us!

Cheers to Fall and Fests!

Soft Data, Warm Data, Little Thread of Emails: The Big Bang Theory Meets ILTACon

by Michele Lange on September 12, 2016 in Document Review, Technology-assisted Review (TAR) with Comments Off

The hit CBS show, The Big Bang Theory, returns this month and fans are eagerly awaiting developments with each character’s storyline – from relationships between Leonard, Penny, Sheldon and Amy to the impending arrival of baby Wolowitz (which may interfere with the gang’s annual Comic-Con plans).

One thing that cannot be interfered with is the legal tech industry’s own Comic-Con – better known as ILTACon. At ILTACon, the Big Bang Theory clan would be right at home, diving headfirst into technologies that improve law firm and corporate law/IT department responsibilities. Frankly, this tradeshow is known for being a total geek-fest. (And the lawyers, litigation support professionals and IT staff in attendance are cool with that.)

Bazinga! Just Another One of Kroll Ontrack’s Inventions

At ILTACon this year, Kroll Ontrack was excited to announce its newest gizmo to aid document review: Communication Insight.

To understand the benefits of Communication Insight, a Relativity-based application, it is worth elaborating on what viewing retrieved emails is like without it. Normally, when an email is reviewed, it is very difficult to piece together conversations and themes. Going through each file is time-consuming (read: expensive) and presents the risk that important information will be missed because the email is not viewed as part of a whole conversation. The bottom line – document review needs to be intuitive, as discussed at ILTACon by Kroll Ontrack product director Wendy King in a short video interview with LegalTech News’ Ian Lopez.

Kroll Ontrack Presents: Fun with Emails

At its core, Communication Insight makes it easier to view threads of emails and understand what happened in the entirety of the conversation. With this technology, the user is able to tell when the subject of an email changed, who was part of the conversation and if attachments were dropped. It provides a comprehensive overview of the conversation, so that complicated email chains can be read in context. Emails are displayed in a manner familiar to email users and the program notifies users if someone was added to or left the conversation. Through a logical display of conversation data and dynamic visual cues, reviewers can quickly make decisions and intuitively focus their review.

For Relativity users, Communication Insight is a new feature Kroll Ontrack is proud to bring to the platform. #ILTACon2016 attendees seeing Communication Insight in action noted that it gives them everything they need, front and center…and even a non-geek can appreciate that.

Relativity Certifications—Helping You Learn the Lingo

by Eric Robinson on July 25, 2016 in Document Review, Ediscovery, Other, Product Tips with Comments Off

For Relativity gurus, making sense of kCura’s certification system is likely no sweat. However, for ediscovery outsiders or legal/IT professionals new to Relativity, all of the classes, tests and designations are a bit overwhelming. While kCura’s certification system is not overly complicated, it takes some time to learn the lingo. To speed up your learning curve, take five minutes to familiarize yourself with the Relativity certification structure.

PREPARING FOR A RELATIVITY EXAM? WATCH THIS VIDEO from Kroll Ontrack.

Why Get a Relativity Certification?

If you work for a corporation, law firm or service provider utilizing Relativity for ediscovery, there is no better way to learn new Relativity features and provide more value to your organization than to get certified. The Relativity certification programs are for individuals looking to validate their knowledge and expertise in the software.

What Relativity Certifications Are Available?

kCura offers eight certifications for Relativity:

Relativity Certified Administrator (RCA) – The keystone certification, targeted at case administrators working day-to-day in Relativity.
Relativity Analytics Specialist – For individuals working extensively with Relativity Analytics.
Relativity Infrastructure Specialist – For individuals responsible for setting up, running and troubleshooting a Relativity environment.
Relativity Certified User – For individuals conducting document review within Relativity.
Relativity Assisted Review Specialist – For individuals with expertise in predictive coding within Relativity.
Relativity Processing Specialist – For individuals operating the processing engine in Relativity.
Relativity Project Management Specialist – For individuals troubleshooting case workflows using Relativity.
Relativity Certified Sales Professional (RCSP) – For individuals demonstrating Relativity in a sales setting.
Expert – For RCAs who hold two or three specialist certifications concurrently.
Master – For RCAs who hold four or more specialist certifications concurrently.

How Does the Certification Process Work?

Don’t expect these certifications to come easy. It is generally known that kCura’s exams are not a stroll through the park. Expect to invest plenty of time studying to prepare yourself. Further, in order to sit for one of the exams, candidates have to possess specific experience as a prerequisite. After you pass, you have to keep your certification up to date by earning Relativity Continuing Education (RCE) credits.

Hear What Some RCAs Have to Say

At Kroll Ontrack, many of our team members are ramping up their Relativity expertise. In fact, currently 53 colleagues hold the RCA designation, with several also certified in one or more specialist areas. Of those certified, nine in Kroll Ontrack’s crew have reached the Relativity Expert designation and one hard-working individual at Kroll Ontrack is certified as a Relativity Master.

If you are thinking about earning a Relativity certification, watch this short video to hear how some of Kroll Ontrack’s folks prepared themselves and achieved these important Relativity designations. Then, if you are intrigued to pursue such a certification, set aside time to read the wealth of information available on kCura’s website. As anyone working in ediscovery knows, given the amount of change in the law and technology, continued professional development goes a long way to a prosperous career in ediscovery.

Never Second Guess a Second Request

by Michele Lange on March 30, 2016 in Document Review, Ediscovery, Technology-assisted Review (TAR) with 1 Comment

Massive mergers are never a simple matter for organizations and their antitrust attorneys. The Second Request process can be a major burden for merging organizations since it requires that companies review, analyze and produce massive volumes of data in what can be a very short amount of time. If that doesn’t already cause panic, keep in mind that failing to fully comply can lead to substantial civil penalties and even the rejection of the merger transaction.

While Second Requests are a daunting task for any antitrust lawyer, my colleagues John D. Pilznienski and Sheldon A. Noel recently discussed the requirements counsel must meet to comply with a Second Request and how utilizing analytics like predictive coding can help simplify the process. The article written by Pilznienski and Noel, “Never Second Guess a Second Request: Leveraging Predictive Coding for Reviewing Documents in Antitrust Matters,” appeared in the March 2016 edition of Digital Discovery & e-Evidence, a Bloomberg BNA publication.

Read the article: Never Second Guess a Second Request

What is a Second Request?

For those of you not intimately aware of the corporate merger process, a Second Request is the issuance of a request by the Department of Justice (DOJ) or Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for “additional information and documentary material relevant to the proposed acquisition.” When corporations intending to merge meet a certain financial threshold, their proposed merger is subject to review by federal antitrust agencies. If the DOJ or FTC determines that more information is needed to ensure that there is no violation of federal antitrust laws during the initial review, they can request more information from the merging corporations. These requests can be extremely broad, requiring extensive resources, time and manpower to collect, process and produce the relevant documents and data.

Second Requests, Ediscovery and Predictive Coding: A Case Study

As discussed in the article by Pilznienski and Noel, in a recent technology sector merger the two companies utilized Kroll Ontrack’s predictive coding technology and review platform to respond to an FTC Second Request. The merger presented a number of hurdles – a large data set, multiple jurisdictions, complicated review guidance based on the document requests and an unexpectedly short production deadline – all of which were easily overcome by leveraging predictive coding. From the approximately 600,000 searchable documents, a random sample of approximately 2,300 documents was generated, sampled at a 95% confidence level and a 2% margin of error. After applying a variety of review methods, the most relevant documents were reviewed first, aiding the merging companies in meeting the FTC’s deadline and significantly reducing the costs of review.

Be sure to read the full article, Never Second Guess a Second Request: Leveraging Predictive Coding for Reviewing Documents in Antitrust Matters, for a more in-depth discussion on the application of predictive coding to the Second Request process.

A Light in the Dark: Protecting PII in Ediscovery

by Michele Lange on September 18, 2015 in Document Review, Ediscovery, Product Tips with Comments Off

65% of ediscovery projects contain at least one document with the XXX-XX-XXXX number format. Accidentally disclosing Personally Identifiable Information (PII) could lead to a messy discovery process and costly penalties. Do you know how to best protect PII in ediscovery? Check out this new PII infographic to learn more.

What is PII?

Personally Identifiable Information (PII) is any information about an individual maintained by an organization that can distinguish, trace or link to that individual. This can include anything as benign as a person’s full name to confidential medical, educational, financial and employment information or a social security number.

What’s at Risk in Ediscovery?

While the threat of identity theft looms over individuals who fail to safeguard their personal information, litigation teams are in a unique position. They must be the safeguard that ensures opposing counsel doesn’t accidentally receive confidential medical records, social security numbers or other PII during the discovery process. In a perfect scenario, all PII would be redacted prior to production, but with exponentially increasing volumes of data, PII becomes increasingly at risk of being unintentionally compromised in litigation. If an inadvertent disclosure occurs, a legal team may face sanctions.

Assisted Redaction: A Sophisticated Solution

At a basic level, the manual redaction process completely removes targeted content from an electronic document, making it irretrievable and unavailable for view, print, search or copy. Building beyond manual redaction, ediscovery platforms can utilize an automated approach to identifying, verifying and applying user-defined redactions to maximize efficiency in a process known as “assisted redaction.” The assisted redaction application, featured in Kroll Ontrack’s Relativity offering, provides users with full control to review, approve or reject each applied redaction across an entire data collection workspace or subset of data. Assisted redaction streamlines the manual redaction process, reducing the risk of inadvertent disclosure while allowing counsel to quickly and correctly apply user-defined redactions throughout the data.

A Light in the Dark

The ediscovery process may put PII at risk when not carefully managed, but much of that risk can be alleviated when paired with a strong legal team and savvy technology. Shine some light on PII protection in ediscovery before watching Kroll Ontrack’s new video to learn more about assisted redaction and other new capabilities within Kroll Ontrack’s Relativity offering.

Bust these 4 Myths on Your Next Document Review

by Eric Robinson on February 23, 2015 in Document Review, Ediscovery with Comments Off

Conducting an effective and efficient legal document review requires a hybrid of rocket science, brain chemistry and hot coffee. With ediscovery technology and best practices constantly evolving, if your document review practices haven’t changed in the last five years, you are likely wasting time and money for your organization and/or your client. To ensure your practices meet today’s demands, bust these four document review myths on your next ediscovery project.

Myth #1: Document review just happens; you don’t really need a plan.

There is an outmoded notion that document review is a side-show to the main ediscovery attraction; however, that view could not be farther from the truth. Without question, document review is the most expensive aspect of discovery; accordingly, planning for the review should start at the same time the case team is thinking about preservation and collection. Failing to create a big picture plan and a thorough review manual can result in:

Multiple “side reviews” for special issues or newly discovered documents
Downtime for reviewers as they wait around for more work
Documents being touched two or three times

Lesson #1: Don’t let any member of your case team procrastinate when it comes to planning for review.

Myth #2: Any old attorney can conduct (or manage) a document review.

With formidable technology at their fingertips and millions of documents to wrangle, today’s document reviewers are anything but humdrum lawyers. Today’s document reviewers are not only licensed and highly qualified attorneys, but they often have specific training and certifications in various document review platforms. They understand how to employ the strictest quality control protocols to maximize time and minimize the cost of a review. Further, sometimes a review requires expertise in a language other than English or substantive knowledge in the following areas: banking and financial services, pharmaceuticals, insurance, telecommunications, technology, agriculture, transportation, oil and gas, securities, and more.

Lesson #2: Make sure you are equipped with the right people resources for your next review.

Myth #3: All document review technology is equal.

While most major review platforms function in a generally-similar manner, there are significant differences in how the capabilities are executed by users – which impacts the expected results of a specific function. Rock star document review professionals understand and can articulate the features and benefits of multiple review tools and know how and when to leverage features such as workflow, predictive coding, near de-duplication, topic grouping, smart searching, machine translation (just to name a few of the vital technologies key to any modern review). Running searches, batching and assigning documents, categorizing, and performing QC should be second nature for experienced reviewers, and they should know the nuances of these functions in any specific technology platform. If they cannot answer a question, they should know how to get a hold of the technology provider’s technical support team to lend a hand.

Lesson #3: You should not settle for anything less than document review technology superstars.

Myth #4: It will be obvious when you can stop your review…when you run out of documents.

With the advent of predictive coding and other technology assisted review technologies, no longer do attorney’s eyes need to be placed on every document. As such, determining when to call the review “complete” is complex. Today’s document review professionals are skilled at interpreting metrics and reports generated by the document review technology and know when the numbers are showing a high-quality review versus an incomplete review.

Lesson #4: Dust off your math skills (or leverage a specialist) – it’s the only way a savvy document review professional knows when a review is finished.

Leverage Kroll Ontrack for Document Review

With Kroll Ontrack, your document review could not be in better hands, eyes or minds. For nearly a decade, Kroll Ontrack has offered advanced document review services in the US. Now, with a document review facility in London, England – newly opened in December 2014 – Kroll Ontrack’s document review expertise is global.