Category Archives: Enterprise

Law Firm Brinks, Gilson & Lione Highlights Ipro Enterprise eDiscovery for “Ease-Of-Use”

Ipro Ease-Of-Use

Law Firm Brinks, Gilson & Lione Highlights Ipro Enterprise eDiscovery for Ease-Of-Use

Earlier this year, Suzanne O’Mahoney, Director of Paralegal Services and Litigation Support, Brinks, Gilson & Lione, shared some thoughts on why BGL chose Ipro as their eDiscovery solution.

Ease of Use. First Class Support.

We are a boutique law firm focused mainly on patent, trademark, and copyright law. Five years ago, we wanted to update our eDiscovery software from Concordance and after looking at all of our options, the litigation support group at the firm all agreed that Ipro for enterprise was the best solution, especially for its ease-of-use and Ipro’s first class customer support.

Strong Relationships

I love the people at Ipro. I am someone who appreciates good relationships, and if I have a problem, I simply pick up the phone, and Ipro responds immediately. Last year, one of our key players at the firm who handled most of litigation support needed to take family leave. Ipro stepped in and said, “Sue, we’re here for you. Here’s a number. Call us if you need anything, and we will assist and guide you while you’re shorthanded.” I appreciate that. Instead of having to outsource everything, I felt good keeping it in-house, because I had Ipro as a safety net.

A True eDiscovery Partner

Not only do I manage a department, but I’m also a user, and Ipro really listens. If I have a problem and want something changed, they say, “We’ll see what we can do.” As a client, I like that. Ipro is a true professional service partner. They make you feel like you are part of a family.

 

To Hear Clients Talk About the Difference Ipro for Enterprise Can Make, Watch this Video!

Ipro for Enterprise from Ipro eDiscovery & InfoGov on Vimeo.

 

 

Robots Are Your Friends: The Need for Artificial Intelligence in eDiscovery

artificial intelligence eDiscovery

Robots Are Your Friends: The Need for Artificial Intelligence in eDiscovery

JD Supra Readers Choice Top Author 2020Written by Jim Gill
Content Chief, Ipro

I saw this headline on another legal blog a few days ago: AI may be your new Co-Worker! Which of course led to this week’s eDiscovery Blues™ cartoon. For years now, people have been talking about the Rise of the Robot Lawyers in the legal tech industry, but so far, Skynet still hasn’t happened.

In fact, a 2020 survey by Deloitte found that of 1300 CIOs who participated, 60% said Artificial Intelligence (AI) “would assist rather than replace workers.” And there’s no doubt we can use the help.

With the continued growth of data, human efforts alone won’t be enough to manage all of the information created by individuals, businesses, and government agencies. Doug Austin at eDiscoveryToday just published a great piece on Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its effect on eDiscovery.

He states that we can expect “463 exabytes (over 463 million terabytes!) of data to be created each day globally by 2025. Artificial Intelligence (AI) plays a big part of that reason for the mushrooming growth of personal data.  It’s a big mess. Now, with data privacy laws strengthening, since AI helped get us into this mess, can it help get us out?”

In eDiscovery we’re already well aware of the various types of machine learning – clustering and predictive coding are the most prevalent – which legal teams can use to cull large datasets, identify PII, and locate responsive Electronically Stored Information (ESI). But there are still many in-house legal teams and law firms out there who try to apply more manual workflows to these situations without recognizing the value AI can bring.

It’s difficult to put an exact dollar-amount on how much savings a particular technology creates for legal teams, because every matter is unique, with infinite variables involving discovery parameters, data volume, and data types. But Stephen Goldstein, Director of Practice Support at Squire Patton Boggs, speaking at the 2019 Ipro Tech Show, gives a general breakdown of how using predictive coding adds value.

“If you start with 500,000 documents—and they’ve already been de-nisted and threaded, and you’ve gotten down to the core of the data you need to work with—a very good keyword approach would reduce that by about 65%, and you’d still have 175,000 documents. If that is sent to a managed review service, they could plow through them for a charge of around $180,000 for that kind of project, give or take. And that is assuming none of that work comes internal to lawyers who bill $400 an hour but is based on a $40 an hour charge.

“The predictive coding scenario is one that I’m very familiar with, and it’s one that we use. We would probably get an 85% reduction in the data, with fewer documents to review, at a far less cost. And we would have the benefit of that technology being in place to help with QC.”

This benchmark of saving a dollar for every document not sent for outside review – or as I heard one attorney say “a buck a doc” – is important to remember for both corporate in-house legal teams and law firms alike. But to do that with such large datasets, while protecting PII and meeting compliance requirements, you must leverage technology. No need to fear the robot overlords – say hello to your new AI assistant.

 

Learn more about Ipro’s AI & Advanced Analytics!

Ipro for Enterprise from Ipro eDiscovery & InfoGov on Vimeo.

More than Drawing a Black Box: How to Get Redactions Right for eDiscovery Production

How to Get eDiscovery Redactions Right

More than Drawing a Black Box: How to Get Redactions Right for eDiscovery Production

JD Supra Readers Choice Top Author 2020Written by Jim Gill
Content Chief, Ipro

For most people, redacted documents are the material of spy movies and political scandal. But here in the world of eDiscovery and FOIA requests, they’re a part of everyday life. But that doesn’t mean they’re to be taken lightly! Failure to redact documents or to make sure that redacted content is produced in its redacted format can be case ending (and job ending for the person responsible for the error).

The most common reason this happens, is because law firms and government agencies are taking the “redact by hand” route instead of using tools that properly manage productions to ensure documents meet the expected requirements, making sure the information meant to be kept private is hidden.

Even with redaction technology in place, some file types (like spreadsheet documents) can be difficult to redact, as we see in this week’s eDiscovery Blues™ comic. These challenging file types result in the litigation support or FOIA personnel using Microsoft Office and Adobe Acrobat to draw black boxes over the sensitive material, which is fine if the documents are going to be printed to hardcopy but doesn’t actually redact the digital information from the file.

In one 2019 grand jury filing, a member of the press was able to defeat these types of manually created redactions by simply copying the black-out boxes and pasting the text into a new document, which also brought over the text and metadata.

So how can you make sure redactions on digital documents are done correctly?

“That’s kind of the challenge: picking the right tool for the right job,” says Derek Miller, VP of Business Development at Ipro. “Anyone doing redactions and producing redacted documents needs to understand how these tools work and build measures into their processes to avoid this type of mistake. But mainly you want to make sure you have the right tools in your toolbox. Which means using software that’s specifically designed to redact and produce those redactions accurately.”

Here are a few things to look for in software to ensure accurately produced redactions:

  • Automatically re-OCRs documents to remove the text under the redaction
  • Runs validations to make sure the redactions are burned in and the text is correct
  • Creates layered redactions so multiple production sets can be sent to multiple parties

Along with those functions, some eDiscovery software has added protections which identify documents which may need another layer of review before they’re produced. It’s similar to when your email platform asks if you want to send without a subject line or asks if you’ve forgotten an attachment.

One example of this is Ipro’s Production Shield™, which identifies these documents during the validation phase of the export process, giving administrators the opportunity to correct conflicts and ensure only appropriate documents are produced.

The main thing to remember when dealing with Electronically Stored Information (ESI) is that what you see on the screen is only the surface of the existing data. The same goes getting redactions right for eDiscovery: Just because all you see is a black box, doesn’t mean everything that lies beneath has disappeared.

Ipro’s Production Shield™ is available on Ipro’s Enterprise™ and Desktop™ eDiscovery Solutions.

Ipro Integral to LightSpeed Legal Success – Case Study

Ipro LightSpeed Case Study

Ipro Integral to LightSpeed Legal’s Success – Case Study

Flexible, Scalable, Powerful

Since 2006, LightSpeed Legal has provided eDiscovery, forensic, and trial services predominately to Am Law 100 firms in the US, as well as a variety of global clients. To do this successfully, they must quickly and accurately expedite the processing of large quantities of ESI and scanning of documents. As Rith Kem, Chief Strategy Officer at LightSpeed, says, “you can’t do that without the array of flexible options Ipro provides.”

He continues, “Our cases average between 100 and 200 gigabytes, but can quickly balloon to multiple terabytes. Ipro allows a strategic and nimble shop like LightSpeed to give white-glove service to all of our clients.”

Robust Analytics, Unparalleled Productions

When asked about which features specifically stand out, Rith responded, “All of the above,” going on to mention Ipro’s intricate processing features and flexibility, document batching, data reduction analytics, email threading, near dedupe, redactions, open APIs for 3rd party analytics, a robust ECA interface, on-the-fly but intricate reporting which includes access to the full metadata, and print options.

“We love that it’s not a black box,” Kem said. “Having access to the underlying database is very important. In a day and age when everything is automated, it’s easy getting data in, but a painful nightmare to have to go back and prove why things were produced the way they were. And we’ve done hundreds of productions using Ipro, and the level of quality to DOJ specifications is unparalleled.”

20 Terabytes, Multiple Languages, No Problem

In one recent case involving a government investigation into bribery charges at a Brazilian corporation, LightSpeed processed over 20 terabytes using Ipro for enterprise and loaded 15 million records into Ipro Review, hosted in LightSpeed’s own secure data center. LightSpeed brought in Portuguese speaking attorneys to begin the review process, and Ipro was selected for its user-friendly interface for review in addition to highly competitive pricing when compared to other platforms.

Analytics were also implemented at strategic points to assist in the efficiency of the review, such as running email threading and near-dupe analysis. Ipro also has a language ID feature that can identify up to 100 different languages. During the review, one reviewer said, “You can often tell when someone is discussing suspicious activity when they switch between languages.” Ipro’s ability to find these anomalies across multiple languages – in this instance, English, Spanish, and Brazilian Portuguese – played a vital role for the reviewers.

Significant Cost Reduction Over Other eDiscovery Products

With any case, strategy evolves as things move forward. Ipro’s flexibility, myriad options, and unlimited scalability have been integral to LightSpeed’s success. “Unlike a few solutions,” Rith said, “you can host Ipro on-premises, in Ipro’s cloud, or in other 3rd party clouds. This along with Ipro’s transparent pricing, allows our clients to significantly reduce costs compared to using other products.”

 

For a deeper look at Ipro for enterprise and how it can help your legal team
Check out our latest product webinar!

Watch Ipro in 2020

In the eDiscovery industry, few can truly execute the practical application of software and processes to help you get your work done quickly and effectively.

That’s why you should check out Ipro in 2020!

Ipro offers proven, battle tested eDisocvery software bundled as a solution and deployed the way you want it – Cloud, On-Prem, Desktop, or Hybrid. We also offer a variety of managed services, including processing & hosting, workflow and case management, as well as trial engagements. That is what makes Ipro more than a software vendor. We’re a true technology partner for your day to day needs.

Flexible, Scalable, Powerful.

New Webinar! Learn How Ipro for Enterprise Reduces Risk & Cost for Corporations

January 23, 2020, 1pm EST

Join Ipro’s Director of Product, Aaron Swenson, as he reviews the all NEW Ipro for enterprise, and how it helps corporations quickly respond to subpoena requests, complex litigation, and internal investigations, while reducing overall cost and risk..

In this webinar showcase you will learn:

  • How your legal team can reduce risk and costs by culling irrelevant documents and intellectual property sent to outside counsel
  • How the latest in AI, Advanced Analytics, and Data Visualization help your team quickly uncover facts in ways that would be impossible with traditional linear search
  • How the new consumer-modeled interface empowers internal and external legal teams to effortlessly collaborate while maintaining a high degree of data security and compliance

Flexible, Scalable, Powerful
Ipro for enterprise can be deployed on-premises, in the cloud, or a hybrid, giving you absolute flexibility to manage environments and hosting costs.

New Webinar! Learn How the All New Ipro for Enterprise is Perfect for Law Firms

January 21, 2020, 1pm EST

Join Ipro’s Director of Product, Aaron Swenson, as he reviews the all NEW Ipro for enterprise, and how it helps law firms locate and understand key case evidence, efficiently run a well-organized legal team, and craft a winning case strategy.

In this webinar showcase you will learn:

  • How your team can upload evidence using Self-Service to quickly ingest, assess, report, and stream millions of documents directly into document review
  • How the latest in AI, Advanced Analytics, and Data Visualization help your team quickly uncover facts in ways that would be impossible with traditional linear search
  • How the new consumer-modeled interface for Review creates efficient document viewing and tagging, with single-click access to document batches, ensuring your team will avoid reviewer document collision.

Flexible, Scalable, Powerful
Ipro for enterprise can be deployed on-premises, in the cloud, or a hybrid, giving you absolute flexibility to manage environments and hosting costs.

Watch On-Demand!

It’s Game On! Ipro Releases new enterprise eDiscovery solution

new Ipro for enterprise

Ipro is excited to announce the release of its new Ipro for enterprise eDiscovery solution. Intuitive and easy-to-use, Ipro for enterprise helps legal teams locate and understand key data, quickly respond to subpoena requests, complex litigation, and internal investigations, and craft a winning litigation strategy, all while reducing overall cost and risk.

“I’m very excited to deliver this release,” says Aaron Swenson, Product Director for Ipro. “There is something for everyone. It significantly raises our user interface bar, and we are one step closer to our vision of reviewers spending zero time on product-specific training, enabling them to spend 100% of their time focused on the case.” He adds, “The geek in me is just as excited to announce our initial offering of APIs, giving our more technical users a new way to engage with the product, with more to come in this area next release. All of this is a result of our customer feedback groups: we couldn’t have done it without you!”

Other New Features:

  • 1 Click access to review sets lets reviewers focus on learning about the case, not the tool
  • AI/Advanced Analytics reduce review burden up to 95% over traditional document review
  • 15x faster processing over traditional approaches, covering more than 500 file types
  • Cost predictability through straight-forward, competitive pricing.

Upload Evidence

Your team can upload Electronically Stored Information (ESI) using Self-Service to quickly ingest, assess, report, and stream millions of documents directly into document review, placing powerful processing capabilities at the point of need while providing visibility into processing job status and completion.

Uncover & Understand

Use AI, Advanced Analytics, and Data Visualization to quickly uncover facts in ways that would be impossible with traditional linear search. These advanced analytics combine concept, timeline, and relationship searches with data visualization tools to provide deeper insight into communication patterns, allowing you to efficiently cull irrelevant documents before sending to review.

Review & Produce

The document reviewer puts the document at the center of attention, allowing you to focus on the work at hand. The modern, consumer-modeled interface creates efficient document viewing and tagging and provides single-click access to document batches, ensuring your team will avoid reviewer document collision.

Flexible, Scalable, Powerful

Ipro for enterprise can be deployed on-premises, in the cloud, or a hybrid, giving you absolute flexibility to manage environments and hosting costs.

For deep insight into case evidence, where and when you need it, schedule a demo today and learn how easy it is to start using Ipro for enterprise.

Is eDiscovery Existing in a Post-Sanctions World?

eDiscovery Sanctions

Is eDiscovery Existing in a Post-Sanctions World?

The short (and obvious) answer is no. Rule 37(e) isn’t going anywhere. But recent case law indicates a trend where sanctions seem to be harder to come by, which may play into what concerns in-house legal teams as they consider the technologies they may need.

A recent infographic, General Counsel: From Lawyers to Strategic Partners (released by Raconteur with data from Walters Kluwer) showed 66% of corporate legal teams saying “Data Breaches and Protection of corporate data” was a top issue keeping them up at night. Sanctions didn’t even make the list.

Recent case law from 2019 supports the lack of sanction fear, as several cases showed that even when evidence was deleted (sometimes knowingly), courts aren’t doling out sanctions in the same way since the 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) went into effect.

As a refresher, Rule 37(e) of the FRCP lays out the threshold for sanctions as follows:

If Electronically Stored Information (ESI) was lost because:

A party didn’t take reasonable steps to preserve it when they should have (i.e. because they knew litigation was imminent)

  • and if the lost ESI can’t be restored or replaced by simply doing discovery again
  • and if there was an intent to deprive the party of information by the loss of the ESI
  • and if the lost ESI actually affects the outcome of the case

…then the court may consider sanctions.

The following examples show that consider is a key word, even when they find the threshold has been met, as in case 3.

United States et al. v. Supervalu, Inc. et al. Nov. 18, 2019 (C.D. Ill. 2019)

Three days after a subpoena, a district pharmacy manager for the defendant sent out an email stating, “Throw away all your competitor’s price matching lists and get rid of all signs that say we match prices.”

The plaintiff alleges there are inconsistencies in both the number and timing of the subsequent litigation holds and accordingly asked the Court for an in-camera review of the three litigation holds which were eventually sent. The plaintiff also believes that the defendant failed to preserve price matching materials responsive to the government subpoena from approximately 80% of their pharmacies nationwide.

But the Court denied sanctions, stating, “Upon reviewing the record, the Court is unable to conclude that Defendants acted in bad faith. If the evidence at trial shows otherwise and bad faith on the part of the Defendants is established, the Court can revisit the issue and consider one or both of the sanctions requested by the Relators or another appropriate sanction.”

Mafille v. Kaiser-Francis Oil Co. May 21, 2019 (N.D. Okla. 2019)

In this case, the plaintiff’s computer was wiped after her termination as part of standard retention policy. When the plaintiff filed for spoliation sanctions, the Court found that the plaintiff’s computer contents were uploaded daily onto the defendant’s LAN server as part of a company policy. So even if her computer were destroyed, the contents could potentially be retrieved if discovery were done on the LAN server. Also, the defendant requested which documents were vital for the plaintiff’s case so they could attempt to retrieve them from the LAN server, but the plaintiff never identified any such items.

Univ. Accounting Serv., LLC v. Schulton. June 7, 2019 (D. Or. 2019)

In this case, the defendant admitted, “I recognize fully that was in violation of the subpoena,” and later said of one particular piece of data, “I deleted the file as fast as I could, because I was petrified at its existence, because it’s exactly the type of damning information that UAS wants to catch me with.”

In US District Judge Michael H. Simon’s Ruling, he states that the Rule 37(e) sanction thresholds “have been satisfied.” Yet, even after meeting the threshold conditions, the judge didn’t order case termination sanctions, but instead chose a permissive inference spoliation instruction against the defendant.

No Sanctions, Why Worry?

Without the specter of sanctions haunting the dreams of in-house legal, does this mean they’ll finally get a good night’s sleep?

Only if they have the processes and technology to manage the exponential growth of data sizes and new file types, which continues to be one of the biggest challenges for corporations, particularly for in-house legal teams who are tasked with mitigating risk involved with enterprise data. To do this, the ability to manage data in a flexible and scalable manner is vital.

Sending a legal hold notice is pretty straightforward. Gaining meaningful and speedy insight into petabytes of data from multiple file types for investigations and subpoenas is much more complex, and forward-looking legal teams are putting their technology to work doing just that.

 

Written by Jim Gill
Content Writer, Ipro

A first step in this process is to use Ipro’s Pre-Litigation Data Checklist as a guide to effectively manage enterprise data in order to avoid potential data pitfalls in the middle of a matter.

Download the Ipro Pre-Litigation Data Inventory Checklist

Ipro Pre-Litigation Data Checklist

New Study Shows In-House Legal as Strategic Enterprise Partners

In-House Legal enterprise partners

New Study Shows In-House Legal as Strategic Enterprise Partners

In a recent stat-filled infographic, General Counsel: From Lawyers to Strategic Partners (released by Raconteur with data from Walters Kluwer), large shifts with in-house corporate legal teams are showing from as recently as two years ago.

One of the main changes is in-house legal departments are becoming valued partners within large enterprises and are increasingly being called upon for their input on business decisions. From data privacy management to regulatory risk mitigation, general counsels now provide a host of vital services for companies to compete in today’s uncertain business environment.

For example, in 2017 the biggest priority for corporate legal departments was improving internal efficiency. This year’s respondents overwhelmingly said that adding to the business and becoming a strategic business partner was their main priority. This is probably a result of the C-Suite seeing the legal department’s ability to bring significant strategic and economic impact to the company as a whole through the use of technology.

Another big arena of change was the priority of data security and data privacy shifting away from in-house legal teams in 2019. This isn’t to say that data management is no longer a priority for companies as a whole but could be a result of more and more corporations creating separate departments focused solely on data, allowing legal to focus on risk mitigation, internal investigations, and compliance.

But even with the growth of in-house legal, only 14% of eDiscovery work was done internally, with the rest being outsourced to traditional or specialist law firms or to alternative legal services providers (ALSP). As companies continue putting a focus on how legal teams can contribute more to business needs overall, this could be a significant area of savings. However, in order to do this, in-house teams will have to develop mature eDiscovery processes and workflows as well as invest in eDiscovery technology.

To read even more statistics regarding corporate in-house legal teams,
Download the Full Infographic!

Written by Jim Gill, Content Writer, Ipro