Even though the details of each E-Discovery effort will vary, you will find certain similarities exist almost universally across all matters.  In the last few years, we have seen basic data formats evolve into de facto standards used for the collection, review, and production of electronic documents. As these standards have come into focus, processing quality has been heavily scrutinized.  The following framework is one way to help ensure proper handling of ESI processing:

ANALYSIS & PRESERVATION:
Technology has changed the way we live our lives and in the process has created an incredibly mobile society. Data is everywhere.  What used to be housed on computers can now be found on PDAs, iPods, Voice-mail, the Internet, flash thumb drives, and much, much more. When looking at what should be discovered, organizations have to think much more lateral than in the past, as data is truly everywhere.

COLLECTION:
Data should always be forensically duplicated if possible. Should the metadata, or deleted files of a potential witness ever come into question, a simple copy job will not stand up in court.

REVIEW & PRODUCTION PLATFORMS:
When going into a review, one of the very first questions that must be decided upon prior to beginning the review is what format the production should be done in.  Currently, the “standard” is to provide TIFF files. Depending on the situation surrounding the case (amount of data, cost, and timing), various other formats may be better suited for the review process. Below are some quick pros and cons:

TIFFs: This is the preferred industry format for all litigation related matters. TIFFs can be easily reviewed electronically, allow for quick bates labeling, and allow for application of redactions.  TIFF’s main drawback is the lack of visual appeal and color. All files are viewed in black and white or grayscale format.

PDFs: Adobe’s PDF format is quickly becoming a popular favorite for images. The key reason people are drawn to PDF’s is its visual look. PDF’s come in color and are a true representation of what the native document looks like. However, there are challenges with PDF documents.  One of the main issues is that unless used within specific hosting systems, PDF’s lack the ability to quickly apply bates numbers and redactions.

NATIVE: If time and cost savings is what you are after, then native format is a great option.  There is no need to wait for processing, so native format review presents a very attractive solution. Generally, native formats are used for a first review to quickly remove irrelevant documents, prior to converting the remaining documents for a more in-depth production review.

CRITERIA/ISSUES:
Prior to commencing a review there are a number of items that should be decided upon. Among them is how to handle unitization, legal issues, and folder paths:

UNITIZATION: Unitization refers to document break distinction – the start and end page which defines a document. For most electronic files, the document breaks are fairly straight forward with 1 MS Word file equaling 1 Document. However, what if the Word document was attached to an e-mail? Would 1 Document equal the email and Word document? Or would that be considered 2 separate documents? And if one is privileged would both items automatically be privileged? Deciding on unitization ahead of time will give the reviewers and the processors a better understanding of the desired end result.

FOLDER PATHS: Paper litigation is familiar with the phrase “in the ordinary course of doing business”. In the electronic world, the equivalent to paper litigation is the file path. The directory and folder paths of each file should be maintained so that the review and eventual production can be conducted properly, and be identified as they would in the course of doing business.

LEGAL ISSUES: How should a team handle tags, redactions, privilege? Is the focus on fraud? Is the focus related to a specific product? a specific date? a specific witness? By clarifying these issues, confusion and delay can be greatly avoided.

FILTERING & CONVERSION PROCESS:
I know this might be shocking, but not all data collected needs to be reviewed. Most computer files contain generic system files which can be eliminated from the review process completely as it will have no relevance to the case at hand. With the use of ECA tools and other scanning software, specific key words, date filters, and the like can be used prior to discovery to help eliminate expense and time on the review of irrelevant material.

ORGANIZATION & REVIEW:
Review is what takes up the bulk of the work during electronic discovery. If reviewers have not been trained thoroughly, are not familiar with the issues specific to the matter, or don’t have a steady stream of documents to look at, things will suffer. When organizing documents for review, it is often more efficient to assign reviewers similar groups of documents so that they are not constantly having to shift gears. Conversation threads should be kept together if possible, and document groups should be based on subject. This will help ensure maximum understanding of the issues, as well as a smooth judgment process. Depending on the skill level of the reviewers, a second level privilege review should be in place to do a quick quality check of all reviewed documents.

PRIVILEGE & REDACTION LOGS:
Case management databases like IPRO Eclipse greatly assist in tracking redactions, tags, and privilege information.  They also greatly aid in managing batch administration and executing complex searches.

PRODUCTION & ARCHIVAL:
Building a production can be very time intensive but this process can be greatly shortened with the aid of products like IPRO Eclipse or IPRO Build. Lead time and quality checks should be built into the production process. This is especially true if the production is being done by a service provider offsite, where processing and mailing time has to be accounted for.