All posts tagged Kroll Ontrack

December 2017 Ediscovery Case Summaries

Court Compels Further Custodian Searches
Mann v. City of Chicago, Nos. 15 CV 9197, 13 CV 4531, 2017 WL 3970592 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 8, 2017)

Court Orders Cooperation in Keyword Search
United States v. New Mexico State Univ., No. 1:16-cv-00911-JAP-LF, 2017 WL 4386358 (D.N.M. Sept. 29, 2017)

Court Grants Motion for a “Quick Peek”
Fairholme Funds, Inc. v. United States, No. 13-456C, 2017 WL 4768385 (Fed. Cl. Oct. 23, 2017)

Court Limits Excessive Redactions in Non-Responsive Data
IDC Fin. Pub., Inc. v. Bonddesk Grp., LLC, No. 15-cv-1085-pp, 2017 WL 4863202 (E.D. Wis. Oct. 26, 2017)

And the Winner Is…

In the past several months, KrolLDiscovery was honored to be included in the Inc. 5000 and Deloitte Technology Fast 500™ lists, and be voted ‘best of’ many times over by the readers of LegalTimes, The Legal Intelligencer and Daily Business Review.

Here’s a full rundown of our recent award highlights:

  • Inc. 5000 – No. 2024; six-time honoree
  • Deloitte Technology Fast 500™ – No. 427; six-time honoree
  • LegalTimes
    • Best End-to-End Ediscovery Provider
    • Best Technology Assisted Review
    • Best Data & Technology Management
    • Best Data Recovery Solution Provider
    • Best Online Review Platform
    • Best Managed Document Review Services
  • Daily Business Review
    • Best Ediscovery Company, Bronze Award
  • The Legal Intelligencer
    • End-to-End Ediscovery, Gold Award
    • Predictive Coding Solution, Gold Award

It’s great to see our world-class customer service and industry-leading applications be recognized by the legal and business communities. Learn more about KrolLDiscovery at www.krolldiscovery.com.

How the Internet of Things has Changed Computer Forensics

More and more, Internet of Things (IoT) devices have been entering the market recently, with the most prominent product being Amazon’s Echo and its smaller counterpart, the Echo Dot, along with Google Home.

What do these devices do?

The Echo and Echo Dot are pretty straight-forward. Users can play music, set an alarm and manage calendars. The user can also activate “skills,” as extensions, in order to add more functions to the Alexa app.

In contrast to other IoT devices, the Amazon Echo does not save data on the device. Instead, it transfers all voice recordings to Amazon’s data center.

Although the recorded data is not saved on the device itself, users are still concerned as to what rights to privacy they have. Trigger words are used to prompt the attention of the device. For the Echo, it is, “Alexa” and for Google Home, it is, “O.K. Google.” Every word spoken after that trigger word is recorded and transferred to the provider’s data center. The recorded data is then stored by Amazon or Google and it is somewhat of a mystery as to what happens to the data from there.

Computer Forensics: Can recorded data solve crimes?

In some cases, the data is used for much more serious situations than one might think. Earlier this year, data from an Echo device was used in a murder investigation. An individual was found dead after a house party in Bentonville, Arkansas, and criminal charges were brought against the owner of the home. Investigators demanded the Echo recordings, and data from the Echo inside the home was used as evidence in the case.

This case demonstrates the impact that IoT devices will have on computer forensic investigations. Investigators are now able to utilize data stored on devices, the cloud and external data centers. When data becomes available to computer forensics specialists, the work becomes the same as any other ordinary case. After forensic investigators create a 1:1 image of the original storage media – a hard disk drive, an SSD, a removable FLASH card, a data tape or any other storage media – they begin to analyze the data. When this assessment is completed, investigators use specialized software tools to search through the data, looking for evidence that can be used in a trial.

Can I stop sharing my data?

While this is a beneficial tool for some criminal investigations, users have the power to turn this feature off. If a user does not want their recordings to be stored, there is a way to delete them. Inside the Alexa app on your smartphone, there is a possibility to delete your voice requests one by one. If you do want to bulk delete, you can do that by signing into your Amazon Account and check out your devices under this link https://www.amazon.com/mn/dcw/myx.html?tag=w050b-20.

At KrolLDiscovery, computer forensics is in our DNA. Our analysts have years of experience investigating real cases and obtaining real results in both civil and criminal contexts, and our analysts are recognized experts in the field. If you have an IoT device, or any media type, that needs investigating, we are here to work with your team.

Hot Topics in Ediscovery

As you get ready to head back to the office this fall, make sure you’re up to speed on some of the most significant developments in ediscovery from this summer.

New Data Protection and Transfer Laws in Japan and China

Earlier this summer, Japan and China enacted significant changes to their data protection and transfer laws. In Japan, the Act on the Protection of Personal Information (APPI) went into full effect on May 30, 2017 and companies are expected to make immediate changes. China’s controversial Cybersecurity Law went into full effect in early June 2017 and focuses on network operators managing data in the country.

Antitrust Law and Technical Innovation

Technological advancements throughout the world have transformed policies and institutions that enforce antitrust law. Check out parts one and two of our video series focusing on how policy and technology changes create implications in the many fields of antitrust law.

Civil Procedure Rules in State Court

Following the release of the 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), states have taken different approaches to updating their own rules. Some states have adopted the new FRCP, other states are currently considering changes and a handful of states march to the beat of their own drum. Learn more about your state and states that may be important to you in the future.

Fighting Fraud in France

Fraud, corruption and bribery hit close to home for legal and IT professionals around the globe. In France, game-changing legislation has taken effect to strengthen anti-corruption efforts. Sapin II, as the legislation is called, is modelled on the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and the U.K. Bribery Act. U.S. businesses with global operations should be prepared with renewed understanding of France’s regulations.

Whether you have a matter that requires collection of electronically stored information (ESI) in a country with strict data protection rules or have questions about state rules of civil procedure, you can keep up to date on everything ediscovery with weekly updates from The Ediscovery Blog.

ILTACON 2017 – Pre-show Preview: Viva Las Vegas!

Look out Vegas, here comes ILTA (again)! After a brief 2016 hiatus to the Gaylord in National Harbor, Maryland, ILTACON is back in Las Vegas for 2017. This year’s conference will be held at the Mandalay Bay, just a couple blocks down the strip from Caesar’s Palace for those of you that attended ILTACON 2015.

When you reach the shimmering gold exterior of the Mandalay Bay, you might be overwhelmed with the abundance of food, entertainment and nightlife opportunities. So, just to make sure you don’t miss any of the valuable activities as ILTACON celebrates its 40th birthday, we thought you might appreciate a pre-show preview.

DATE: This year’s show occurs a week or two earlier than in years past: Make sure you have August 13 – 17 blocked off on your calendar.

SESSIONS: ILTACON is known for its stellar educational sessions and keynote addresses and this year is certain to not disappoint. For those of you tracking trends in predictive coding and analytics, make sure you attend the following session on Monday, August 14 from 1-2pm, where my colleague Tom Barce will be speaking as a part of the panel “Latest Trends in Leveraging Analytics in Litigation Support.”

DEMOS: Many vendors at ILTACON will be demonstrating their innovative products to make your legal technology jobs easier. KrolLDiscovery’s private suite (Surf C Suite) will be open to clients each day. We’ll keep food and beverages stocked for you to take a break from all the action. Plus, we’ll have space for you to learn more about our products, services and how we can help you. Schedule a demo with us today.

PARTIES: After a long day of sessions, make sure you make time for some refreshments! The exhibit hall will open on Monday night from 7-9pm with food, drinks and fun. The theme is “galaxy,” so bring your space-age costumes. Be sure to stop by KrolLDiscovery’s booth #500/502 for cool margaritas after a hot day in Vegas. We will also have snacks and happy hour at booth #500/502 on Tuesday and Wednesday; we look forward to seeing everyone at ILTACON 2017. Viva Las Vegas!

United Kingdom: Ediscovery Around the World

The United Kingdom, a common law jurisdiction, is the second most established geography for ediscovery after the United States. There is a high degree of familiarity with ediscovery in the United Kingdom because edisclosure is a formal stage of the civil litigation process, governed by Part 31 of the Civil Procedure Rules, along with associated Practice Directions.

Our next stop exploring data collection, privacy, proportionality and production practices in the Americas, EMEA and APAC brings us to the United Kingdom.

How are ediscovery practices in the United Kingdom different from neighboring countries or the United States?

Because there has been a keen emphasis on proportionality for a longer time, edisclosure in the United Kingdom is narrower than ediscovery in the United States.  In addition, unlike many of its European neighbours, the United Kingdom has had edisclosure form part of its Civil Procedure Rules for over a decade. During that time, practical know-how regarding ediscovery technology has spread beyond litigation, so most lawyers are comfortable with the advantages a full analysis of electronic evidence can bring to their case.

How are data protection and privacy laws impacting ediscovery in the U.K.?

U.K. law firms frequently face cross-border discovery issues, which comes with the significant challenge of transferring data across borders to countries where different rules and regulations apply. While the United Kingdom is considered less strict than Russia and China, the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) might change this. Further, impending Brexit implications are also expected to have some impact on the way that data is handled for disputes and investigations in the United Kingdom. The bottom line: in the midst of this uncertainty, it seems sure that there will be more scrutiny on the holding of personal data and more fearsome penalties for mishandling personal data in the future.

What best practices are recommended for conducting ediscovery in the United Kingdom?

Akin to ediscovery practices around the world, edisclosure in the U.K. is often delivered by collective teams, making teamwork an absolute best practice. Further, similar to many other countries, disclosure and regulatory deadlines must be met in a well-ordered and timely fashion. The urgency and precise requirements of ediscovery cases carry a high degree of risk, so “getting it right” calls for expertise, care and coordination, as well as responsive support. For this reason, practicing ediscovery is as much about the people you work with, as it is about the technology you use.

In the U.K., companies and their counsel are interested in taking a more surgical approach to data selection. Instead of using keywords, review platforms offer analytical tools that can reveal more about the data, helping to provide a better understanding of who was involved, how they communicated and the words they actually used. In medical terms, this level of sophistication is akin to keyhole surgery, as opposed to older and cruder methods. Additionally, ediscovery technology can be used to perform proactive checks on employee behavior. Keeping up to date with ediscovery market developments is another new ‘best practice.’ The United Kingdom has a competitive ediscovery industry, so being able to quickly select the right provider for a quantifiable advantage (such as local presence or a particular technology) is of tremendous benefit.

Looking to stay up to speed on global ediscovery practices? Don’t miss this whitepaper, “A Practical Guide to Cross-Border Ediscovery.” From predictive coding practices in Australia and Ireland to cooperation in Canada, KrolLDiscovery is your international ediscovery resource.

Using Cellebrite in Mobile Phone Investigations

What happens when your company is facing probable litigation and key evidence is located on a smart phone? Demand for mobile device data is increasing in litigation and investigations and it presents a complex, new playing field for legal professionals and computer forensics experts.

New Tools Specifically for Cell Phone Forensics

Drilling into a phone’s memory requires a certain level of process and technology expertise and if the technology product Cellebrite is not currently on your radar, it will likely surface soon. Cellebrite is a widely used mobile device forensics tool for data extraction and analysis. The combination of Cellebrite software and hardware helps the investigator delve into the messages, phones calls, voicemails, images, browsing history and more contained on a smart phone chip.

KrolLDiscovery on the ILTA Blog

KrolLDiscovery computer forensic expert Jason Bergerson recently explained how Cellebrite assists in mobile device examinations. Appearing on the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) blog, Mobile Phone Forensics: Understanding Cellebrite Extraction Reports answers these questions:

  • What processes and tools are used to investigate mobile devices?
  • What limitations exist when extracting data from a mobile device?
  • What are the common reports generated by Cellebrite?
  • How are these reports leveraged by a forensic investigator?

To shine light on mobile device discovery and view a sample Cellebrite report, read Jason Bergerson’s ILTA blog post: Mobile Phone Forensics: Understanding Cellebrite Extraction Reports.

March 2017 Ediscovery Case Summaries

Judge Peck Has Had Enough of “Meaningless Boilerplate Responses”
Fischer v. Forrest, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28102 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2017)

“Unusually Deplorable” Conduct Costs Plaintiff $7 Million in Sanctions
Shawe v. Elting, 2017 Del. LEXIS 61 (Del. Feb. 13, 2017)

Ignorance of the Technology is No Excuse; Businesses Have a Duty to Ensure Confidential Information Cannot be Accessed
Harleysville Ins. Co. v. Holding Funeral Home, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18714 (W.D. Va. Feb. 9, 2017)

California Department of Education Gets Schooled in Ediscovery Production Formats
Morgan Hill Concerned Parents Ass’n v. Cal. Dep’t of Educ., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14983 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 1, 2017)

Court Finds That “Form Over Substance” Does Not Satisfy Motion to Compel Production of ESI
Excel Enters. v. Winona PVD Coatings, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22932 (N.D. Ind. Feb. 17, 2017)

The Luck of the Irish…and Predictive Coding

On this St. Patrick’s Day, it’s opportune to revisit a prominent Irish judicial opinion – in fact, the first known judicial opinion in Europe to endorse predictive coding.

In the spring of 2015, Ireland embraced predictive coding in Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd v. Quinn [2015] IEHC 175, a case holding that, in the discovery of large data sets, technology assisted review (TAR) using predictive coding is at least as accurate as, and probably more accurate than, the manual or linear method of identifying relevant documents.

The judgment is a great read for predictive coding pundits and a shining endorsement of the potential benefits of this technology. Specifically, the court held that:

  • The rules of court in Ireland do not require a manual document review to be carried out;
  • The evidence establishes that in discovery of large data sets, TAR using predictive coding is at least as accurate as, and probably more accurate than, the manual or linear method in identifying relevant documents;
  • As TAR combines man and machine, the process must contain appropriate checks and balances which render each stage capable of independent verification. The parties need to agree to these;
  • Provided the process has sufficient transparency, TAR using predictive coding discharges a party’s discovery obligations;
  • Predictive coding will save time and money if used to refine a data set and to limit the pool of documents to be manually reviewed. It was projected that 10% of the 680,809 documents would need to be manually reviewed after employing predictive coding, as compared to the traditional linear review estimate that required a team of 10 experienced reviewers, a nine month time frame and a cost of two million Euros; and
  • Parties should first agree to the use of predictive coding, run agreed upon keyword searches to initially refine the data set and then use predictive coding subject to agreed-upon checks and balances. Documents suggested by the software as being potentially relevant should then be reviewed manually by a human review team.

The ruling addressed major concerns expressed about predictive coding and sought to sway the skeptics. It unequivocally stated that predictive coding will save time and money. Although there is no specific reference to proportionality in Irish law, the judgment stated that cost should not be a barrier on access to justice.

The Irish opinion relied significantly on Judge Peck’s Da Silva Moore opinion, setting the predictive coding tone in the United States in 2012. A year after Ireland’s Quinn opinion, the U.K. would celebrate its first judicial opinion referencing predictive coding when the English High Court issued Pyrrho Investments Ltd. v. MWB Property Ltd. [2016] EWHC 256 (Ch). In that case, Master Matthews estimated that predictive coding would offer significant cost savings and that the possible disclosure of over two million documents done via traditional manual review would be disproportionate and “unreasonable.” Late in 2016, Australia joined the list of countries tackling predictive coding issues when Justice Vickery from the Supreme Court of the State of Victoria issued a key opinion in McConnell Dowell Constructors v. Santam.

As we continue through 2017, what country will be next to focus on predictive coding? Don’t miss any development; subscribe to KrolLDiscovery’s weekly email updates.

Mobile Data Extraction: A Combination of Wizardry, Genius and Magic

In early February, KrolLDiscovery sponsored a Legaltech educational session focused on mobile devices and extracting the data contained therein. You need not be a computer wizard to appreciate the volumes of relevant data housed on the mobile device in your hand; however, extracting that data does take a spark of genius. The standards and technology for extracting mobile device data are still progressing, variable and slightly confusing.

The Legaltech panel assembled to discuss this very topic included the following mobile device wizards:

  • Michael Burg, corporate counsel for DISH Network,
  • Clifford Nichols, senior counsel for Day Pitney,
  • Rich Robinson, ediscovery and information manager for JCPenney, and
  • Jason Bergerson, director of consulting operations for KrolLDiscovery.

The panel focused on four key topics:

  • How mobile phones and applications differ across device types
  • How to get access to mobile device data (or try to prevent collection from mobile devices in the first place)
  • How to collect and extract data once you have access
  • How to develop findings from the reporting and information you attain

A Law.com journalist in the audience memorialized some of the panelists’ remarks and advice. Take time to read the article “Mobile Data Extraction 101: How to Deal With Complex Mobile Data Structuring” to increase your own mobile forensics magic skills.

 
css.php