I look forward to reading Craig Ball's "Ball in Your Court" article in Law Technology News each month because they are thought provoking. To futher Mr. Ball's article in July's LTN, "Fields of Gold- Part 2 of our 'how to' guide to effective, defensible e-discovery searches" (http://www.lawtechnews.com/r5/showkiosk.asp?listing_id=3259581&category_id=27902), what must you do to prove to a court of law the efficiency of a search? How does one go about proving the negative (i.e., providing proof that some piece of evidence doesn't exist)? The short answer is to set up a process that is consistent and repeatable across all custodians, data stores and increments of data. That process must provide a tracking mechanism not only for the steps taken and results, but also should include the reason(s) for the decisions. Project management is key and incorporated as a matter of course by most experienced litigation support professionals.

Another way to approach the challenge is to outline a series of questions that goes back to old journalism techniques (i.e., the five W's- who, what, when where, why). The big question is, of course, "How?" with the triple constraints of scope, time, and money.

• Who - Which custodians should be reviewed; who will perform the searches; who should make the decisions for the review or for each phase.
• What - Is all the data necessary for each custodian; what data can be included and more importantly excluded; did the parties agree to the "what" in the meet and confer; what is the workflow and review methodology (e.g., cull and review a subset of data for production vs. cull and produce results outside of non-responsive/privilege search with only a sampling of the results); what are the risks; what are the core requirements for a review application to meet the needs of the review; what is the cost of different review approaches and does that meet the client's budget weighed against the risks.
• When - What are the deadlines for each phase of the litigation cycle (e.g., meet and confer, start and cut-off of discovery, deposition, briefing & hearing schedules, trial); what are the optimal and likely schedules for the harvesting, review, and productions given resources allocated to each phase.
• Where - Where will the data be staged and reviewed (local, distributed, national/global review).
• Why - For each of the above, reasons should be included (e.g., why custodians a, b, c; why certain data was included/excluded, why there is a deadline (court imposed or otherwise); why location X vs Y).
• How - How does each phase and milestone get accomplished. Usually it involves human (personnel, vendors, 3rd parties) and not-so-human resources (hardware, software, workflow & processes). One of the biggest omissions I've seen is a lack of a communications process to ensure key stakeholders, clients, and team members are to be kept informed. How will that be done (e.g., meetings, email, more formal document). This then turns into a loop of who will provide what and when.

Using this technique as a launch pad for planning and decision-making during each phase will assist in being prepared for risks that are unknown unknowns.

Monica Paskvan, PMP

IPRO Tech, Inc. is pleased to announce 2.0.0 major release of IPRO eReview® by the end of April, 2009. IPRO eReview is a review application that provides distributed access through the web that requires no installation of software and allows a jumpstart on review and analysis of the evidence. eReview's integration with eCapture, IPRO's electronic processing software that is extremely scalable, makes eReview the fastest streamlined workflow at an unbeatable value for its clients. eReview is easy to use and intuitive, making training minimal, and provides TIFF on-the-fly so that additional passes for redactions don't have to be performed eliminating extra time and reducing review costs. New features to be released include:  

• Batch selection criteria (automatic, file type, saved search and tags) 
• Rule Based tagging within tag group (providing the ability for a custom and specific workflow)  
• User defined hotkeys (including hotkeys for tags) 
• Case/Batch selection (batch selection for Reviewers for assigned batches) 
• Manage Clients (Administrators can create a hierarchy to organize client data. This also provides great flexibility for assignment of licenses allowing the assignment to be on the parent client level or sub-client level with the rise and fall of workloads on projects.) 
• Manage Administrators (Administrator accounts are related to client hierarchy. Licenses are now consumed upon launch of the Review database window rather than upon login into the portal and Administration area. Thus a license will only be used for actual review and not for Administrative work.) 
• Manage Users (assignment of permissions and roles for users is now related to the client hierarchy.) 
• Collapsible & Sizeable Panels (providing the ability to size areas for tags, notes, and document relations.)  

 

Contact your legal account manager via sales@iprocorp.com or visit us at our annual User Conference in Phoenix, AZ on May 14-15, 2009. Make a reservation by registering at http://www.iproconference.eventbrite.com/ .

 

The whirlwind called LegalTech NY is behind us and now it’s time to incorporate all the great suggestions and feedback into IPRO Eclipse in preparation for the release.  IPRO Eclipse was previewed in three locations: the IPRO Eclipse booth, the main booth, and in the Suite.   The interest was overwhelming and extremely positive. It clearly is a product the marketplace needs. The planned release date is 6/2009 and it will be launched at LegalTech West with a big party and celebration.  

For those of you who have not heard about IPRO Eclipse, it’s a litigation database (IPRO Database and SQL Server options) that gives you the power to effectively control all aspects of your case from capture to production. It was designed from the ground up to support foreign language documents (Unicode) and large document collections. It eliminates the need for you to move data between multiple applications to do your job. We took everything we learned in 20 years of supporting the legal marketplace and created a new database solution; that consolidates both your electronic data and imaged data into one unified database.

I would like to hear what features and functionality you would like to see in IPRO Eclipse; and what is a priority for you and your organization.

Whenever I hear the discussion of speed in the use of a SaaS technology or 'cloud-computing' I get the same gut reaction of hearing someone say, 'how hard is it?'

Just like a person's reference of how difficult a task is can vary so greatly, so can the impression of speed when talking about a responsive Internet connection or use of web-based applications in general.

When I am asked about the 'speed' of the SaaS environment we offer there are so many benefits in relation to speed it is difficult to know where to start.

Anyone considering the route of SaaS solutions may be intrigued by the 'speed' to adopt a solution and be operational. With no need to purchase equipment, configure those components into an existing network infrastructure, or installation of a new application. The 'speed' to adopt is by far superior to any on premises implementation.

Then there is the 'speed' of upgrades to the application. Many SaaS applications upgrade without the user recognizing. A popular web meeting program will simply notify you the next time you login that a new version has been updated and you need to perhaps upgrade a few Active-X controls. Our offering goes even farther to schedule upgrades with each individual user allowing for a scheduled upgrade that does not conflict with any business processes and the 'speed' benefit comes from having that third party handle all the arrangements from pre-tasks, process of upgrade, and post tasks to verify everything runs smoothly.

The last one I will mention is the most common interpretation of 'speed'; what the end user experiences when connecting to the web site to obtain access to their SaaS application. Of course there are a plethora of components that can affect this 'speed' both positively and negatively. There are the considerations of what is bandwidth available to the user logging in, but this is also going to be experienced if that user is attempting to remote into their work pc from home or on the road through some sort of a VPN connection such as Citrix or Terminal Services, and who’s to say connection to their local file server is degraded due to some other activities occurring on the corporate environment.

 Also is the available bandwidth through the SaaS provider to their service. This concern is legitimate considering all the host review applications that are out there. However if you are receiving your review software through a true SaaS provider, the network implementation is typically far superior than the average hosting server in the same server room as everything else within a business. Why? It's simple, that is the competitive advantage and core purpose for SaaS providers to offer the most reliable and efficient access. It is unlikely that the IT staff that has all the concerns of any other corporate IT department will put in the same level of technology or scrutiny to host a review application in-house than a SaaS provider implements in their services.

Welcome to the new IPRO blog. I'm Joe Utsler, Vice President of Product Strategy, and I'll be a regular contributor to this blog. I'm a fairly new employee at IPRO, but I've been part of the family for years - working alongside Jim King, Terri Tipton, and others to promote best of breed technology in litigation. In truth, although I've been referred to as The Evangelist for a particular product, I have always championed the best solutions available – regardless of who offered them. Over the years, I've spent a lot of time with attorneys, analysts, and litigation support managers, listening to their needs and creating a vision. Those of you who know me, know that I've always pushed for the tools that are going to make you more productive, and allow you to actually go home at night. My move to IPRO is not a departure from that vision; it's an affirmation of it. I want to work with a team that understands the way the industry works, and is not afraid to push for new ways to make it work better. I want a company that is as committed to the relationship with its customers as I am. Mostly, I want the chance to deliver on the promises I've been making to you. Jim King has given me that opportunity at IPRO, and I couldn't be more excited.

How am I planning to deliver? In 2009, we are going to be releasing our new Discovery Management System, IPRO Eclipse. Eclipse is more than just a litigation database; it is designed to give you the power to effectively control all aspects of your case from capture to production. It is very much my wish list for the next generation litigation technology. I've been traveling around the country giving people a sneak peek, and the response has been excellent. I am really looking forward to being able to show it at LegalTech New York at the beginning of February. If you are going to be at the show, If you are going to be there, make sure to come see Terri Tipton and I in the Eclipse booth (#302). We're away from the main IPRO booth, by the escalator on the first floor of the trade show.

Oh, and one more thing. This year, IPRO Tech, Inc. is celebrating its 20th year of developing innovative litigation software solutions. During that time, the IPRO family has grown, and so has our circle of friends. We want to celebrate those relationships and so we'll be sponsoring anniversary events throughout the year Even if you can't make it to a live event, you can still be a part of the celebration! Visit our Facebook Virtual Reunion page (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=38214052301) to see pictures and stories from the last 20 years, and to share your own IPRO memories. Still not enough social networking? Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/iprotech