Writers Summit 09 - Why eDiscovery is a ProblemRalph Losey

396 views
343 views

Published on

Why eDiscovery is a Problem: Searching for Truth and Justice in Chaotic Disconnected Information Silos.
Ralph C. Losey

Learn more about the EMC Content Management Writer's Summit here: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=90751&trk

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
396
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Writers Summit 09 - Why eDiscovery is a ProblemRalph Losey

  1. 1. Why e-Discovery is a Problem: Searching for Truth and Justice in Chaotic Disconnected Information Silos Ralph C. LoseyFriday, June 5, 2009
  2. 2. Why e-Discovery is a Problem: Searching for Truth and Justice in Chaotic Disconnected Information Silos Ralph C. Losey Lawyer: Shareholder and Chair of Akerman Senterfitts e- Discovery Practice Group 30 years Litigation experience; last 3, only e-Discovery Adjunct Professor, Univ. of Florida, School of Law, on e- discovery Author: Introduction to e-Discovery: New Cases, Ideas and Techniques (ABA 2009) E-Discovery: Current Trends and Cases (ABA 2008) HASH: the New Bates Stamp, 12 Journal Technology Law & Policy 1 (June 2007) Websites: e-Discovery Team (weekly blog): www.ralphlosey.wordpress.com www.FloridaLawFirm.com (personal web on IT and Law)Friday, June 5, 2009
  3. 3. Why e-Discovery is a Problem: Searching for Truth and Justice in Chaotic Disconnected Information Silos Ralph C. Losey Lawyer: Shareholder and Chair of Akerman Senterfitts e- Discovery Practice Group 30 years Litigation experience; last 3, only e-Discovery Adjunct Professor, Univ. of Florida, School of Law, on e- discovery Author: Introduction to e-Discovery: New Cases, Ideas and Techniques (ABA 2009) E-Discovery: Current Trends and Cases (ABA 2008) HASH: the New Bates Stamp, 12 Journal Technology Law & Policy 1 (June 2007) Websites: e-Discovery Team (weekly blog): www.ralphlosey.wordpress.com www.FloridaLawFirm.com (personal web on IT and Law)Friday, June 5, 2009
  4. 4. The Failure of Business to Adopt ECM is Destroying American System of Justice No Justice Without Truth. No truth if you cannot find the relevant evidence.Friday, June 5, 2009
  5. 5. The Failure of Business to Adopt ECM is Destroying American System of Justice No Justice Without Truth. No truth if you cannot find the relevant evidence.Friday, June 5, 2009
  6. 6. The Failure of Business to Adopt ECM is Destroying American System of Justice No Justice Without Truth. No truth if you cannot find the relevant evidence.Friday, June 5, 2009
  7. 7. The Failure of Business to Adopt ECM is Destroying American System of Justice No Justice Without Truth. No truth if you cannot find the relevant evidence.Friday, June 5, 2009
  8. 8. Most Trial lawyers Are LudditesFriday, June 5, 2009
  9. 9. Most Trial lawyers Are LudditesFriday, June 5, 2009
  10. 10. Most Trial lawyers Are LudditesFriday, June 5, 2009
  11. 11. Most Trial lawyers Are LudditesFriday, June 5, 2009
  12. 12. Most Trial lawyers Are LudditesFriday, June 5, 2009
  13. 13. Most Trial lawyers Are LudditesFriday, June 5, 2009
  14. 14. Here is what we all want.Friday, June 5, 2009
  15. 15. Here is what we all want.Friday, June 5, 2009
  16. 16. Processing Preservation Information Identification Review Production Presentation Translucent Fill Management Translucent Fill Collection Analysis Volume Relevance emuloV ecnaveleR sisylanA noitcelloC tamarofnI acfiitnedI oitcudorP tatneserPFriday, June 5, 2009
  17. 17. Electronic Discovery Reference Model Processing Preservation Information Identification Review Production Presentation Translucent Fill Management Translucent Fill Collection Analysis Volume Relevance emuloV ecnaveleR sisylanA noitcelloC tamarofnI acfiitnedI oitcudorP tatneserPFriday, June 5, 2009
  18. 18. In re Fannie Mae Securities Litigation  _ F.3d _, 2009 WL 215282009, (D.C. App. Jan. 6, 2009).Friday, June 5, 2009
  19. 19. In re Fannie Mae Securities Litigation  _ F.3d _, 2009 WL 215282009, (D.C. App. Jan. 6, 2009).Friday, June 5, 2009
  20. 20. In re Fannie Mae Securities Litigation  _ F.3d _, 2009 WL 215282009, (D.C. App. Jan. 6, 2009). ‣ $6 Million to Comply with an e- Discovery SubpoenaFriday, June 5, 2009
  21. 21. In re Fannie Mae Securities Litigation  _ F.3d _, 2009 WL 215282009, (D.C. App. Jan. 6, 2009). ‣ $6 Million to Comply with an e- Discovery Subpoena ‣ 9% of Total Annual Budget of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise OversightFriday, June 5, 2009
  22. 22. In re Fannie Mae Securities Litigation  _ F.3d _, 2009 WL 215282009, (D.C. App. Jan. 6, 2009). ‣ $6 Million to Comply with an e- Discovery Subpoena ‣ 9% of Total Annual Budget of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight ‣ 400 keywords; 660,000 emails and attachments; 80% of all agency’s emailFriday, June 5, 2009
  23. 23. Today’s headlinesFriday, June 5, 2009
  24. 24. Today’s headlines ‣ Former Countrywide Financial Corp. Chief Executive Officer Angelo Mozilo and two of his top deputies were sued by the SEC for allegedly hiding the home lender’s deteriorating finances as the subprime mortgage crisis unfolded.Friday, June 5, 2009
  25. 25. Today’s headlines ‣ Former Countrywide Financial Corp. Chief Executive Officer Angelo Mozilo and two of his top deputies were sued by the SEC for allegedly hiding the home lender’s deteriorating finances as the subprime mortgage crisis unfolded. ‣ In one e-mail, he described a “particularly profitable subprime product as ‘toxic.’” He also wrote that Countrywide was “flying blind” and had “no way” to determine the risks of some adjustable-rate mortgages, the SEC said.Friday, June 5, 2009
  26. 26. Review is ExpensiveFriday, June 5, 2009
  27. 27. Review is ExpensiveFriday, June 5, 2009
  28. 28. Review is ExpensiveFriday, June 5, 2009
  29. 29. Review is Expensive Cost to Review now runs about $5.00 per computer file.Friday, June 5, 2009
  30. 30. Review is Expensive Cost to Review now runs about $5.00 per computer file. Can range from $3.00 to $10.00 per file; Fannie Mae was $9.09Friday, June 5, 2009
  31. 31. Review is Expensive Cost to Review now runs about $5.00 per computer file. Can range from $3.00 to $10.00 per file; Fannie Mae was $9.09 Review for relevance, privilege, confidentiality, issue tagging and LoggingFriday, June 5, 2009
  32. 32. Review is Expensive Cost to Review now runs about $5.00 per computer file. Can range from $3.00 to $10.00 per file; Fannie Mae was $9.09 Review for relevance, privilege, confidentiality, issue tagging and Logging Aver 16,000 files per gig = $80,000Friday, June 5, 2009
  33. 33. Review is Expensive Cost to Review now runs about $5.00 per computer file. Can range from $3.00 to $10.00 per file; Fannie Mae was $9.09 Review for relevance, privilege, confidentiality, issue tagging and Logging Aver 16,000 files per gig = $80,000 the following facts are Typical:Friday, June 5, 2009
  34. 34. Review is Expensive Cost to Review now runs about $5.00 per computer file. Can range from $3.00 to $10.00 per file; Fannie Mae was $9.09 Review for relevance, privilege, confidentiality, issue tagging and Logging Aver 16,000 files per gig = $80,000 the following facts are Typical: 20 Custodians with 50,000 emails/attachments each = One Million ESIFriday, June 5, 2009
  35. 35. Review is Expensive Cost to Review now runs about $5.00 per computer file. Can range from $3.00 to $10.00 per file; Fannie Mae was $9.09 Review for relevance, privilege, confidentiality, issue tagging and Logging Aver 16,000 files per gig = $80,000 the following facts are Typical: 20 Custodians with 50,000 emails/attachments each = One Million ESI ECM - weak or non-existent for email.Friday, June 5, 2009
  36. 36. Review is Expensive Cost to Review now runs about $5.00 per computer file. Can range from $3.00 to $10.00 per file; Fannie Mae was $9.09 Review for relevance, privilege, confidentiality, issue tagging and Logging Aver 16,000 files per gig = $80,000 the following facts are Typical: 20 Custodians with 50,000 emails/attachments each = One Million ESI ECM - weak or non-existent for email. Relevance Search Culling reduces down to 10% = 100,000 ESI to be produced.Friday, June 5, 2009
  37. 37. Review is Expensive Cost to Review now runs about $5.00 per computer file. Can range from $3.00 to $10.00 per file; Fannie Mae was $9.09 Review for relevance, privilege, confidentiality, issue tagging and Logging Aver 16,000 files per gig = $80,000 the following facts are Typical: 20 Custodians with 50,000 emails/attachments each = One Million ESI ECM - weak or non-existent for email. Relevance Search Culling reduces down to 10% = 100,000 ESI to be produced. Client still cannot afford $500,000 just to review emails.Friday, June 5, 2009
  38. 38. Science of SearchFriday, June 5, 2009
  39. 39. Science of Search ‣ Recall and PrecisionFriday, June 5, 2009
  40. 40. Science of Search ‣ Recall and Precision ‣ In searching for potentially responsive documents, iterative validation should MINIMIZE false negatives and false positives.Friday, June 5, 2009
  41. 41. Science of Search ‣ Recall and Precision ‣ In searching for potentially responsive documents, iterative validation should MINIMIZE false negatives and false positives. ‣ Jason baron - TREC Legal TrackFriday, June 5, 2009
  42. 42. Science of Search ‣ Recall and Precision ‣ In searching for potentially responsive documents, iterative validation should MINIMIZE false negatives and false positives. ‣ Jason baron - TREC Legal Track ‣ traditional Negotiated Keyword Search Usually Sucks (22% recall)Friday, June 5, 2009
  43. 43. Science of Search ‣ Recall and Precision ‣ In searching for potentially responsive documents, iterative validation should MINIMIZE false negatives and false positives. ‣ Jason baron - TREC Legal Track ‣ traditional Negotiated Keyword Search Usually Sucks (22% recall) ‣ Multimodal and iterative Sampling is the wayFriday, June 5, 2009
  44. 44. Science of Search ‣ Recall and Precision ‣ In searching for potentially responsive documents, iterative validation should MINIMIZE false negatives and false positives. ‣ Jason baron - TREC Legal Track ‣ traditional Negotiated Keyword Search Usually Sucks (22% recall) ‣ Multimodal and iterative Sampling is the way ‣ Judgmental and Random SamplingFriday, June 5, 2009
  45. 45. Metrics and new Technologies/Methods In re: Seroquel Products Liability Litigation, 244 F.R.D. 650 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 21, 2007). “Common sense dictates that sampling and other quality assurance techniques must be employed to meet requirements of completeness. If AZ took such steps, it has not identified or validated them.”Friday, June 5, 2009
  46. 46. QUESTIONS?Friday, June 5, 2009
  47. 47. QUESTIONS?Friday, June 5, 2009

×