The Electronic Discovery Reference  Model: what does it mean for your organization?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

The Electronic Discovery Reference Model: what does it mean for your organization?



Attend this session and learn how EDRM guidelines, coupled with other legal ramifications, impact how you do business today and—more important—in the future. We’ll discuss the costs of outside ...

Attend this session and learn how EDRM guidelines, coupled with other legal ramifications, impact how you do business today and—more important—in the future. We’ll discuss the costs of outside IT and how compliance solutions impact downstream expense. And we’ll address the question of how, with complex rules and diverse regulations governing retention schedules, your organization can come to terms with growing demands while still delivering quality service to your company.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    The Electronic Discovery Reference  Model: what does it mean for your organization? The Electronic Discovery Reference Model: what does it mean for your organization? Presentation Transcript

    • The EDRM (Electronic Discovery Reference Model): what does it mean for your organization? Robert L. Tallman IM Pre Sales Practice – Compliance, Archiving and eDiscovery 1 ©2010 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice
    • – Subtitle goes here Information and eDiscovery Background and Update 2
    • eDiscovery … Complexity and Risk Amount of Information Number of People Involved Complexity of Process 3
    • The Infinite Retention Trap Generate More “Disk is Cheap” Buy More Retain More Information & Applications 4
    • – 1750 – 1900: 150 years to double – 1900 – 1950: 50 years to double – 1950 – 1960: 10 years to double – 1960 – 1992: 5 years to double – IDC 2007 - there was more digital data (bytes) created, captured, and replicated than there are stars in the universe – It is now estimated that the digital universe measures 900 exabytes (900 billion gigabytes), and the number is projected to double every 18 months – By 2020, some estimate that information will double every 73 days 5
    • Complexity – Number of People Discovery Manager IT HR Corporate Legal Outside Firms (Applications/DB's, Business Units (Protected Emp Data, (Case Planning, (Evidence Collection , Document (Custodians) Privacy Rules) Evidence Reviews) Outside Council) Repositories) Management Legal R&D Custodians 10’s – 1000’s Sales & Marketing 6
    • Complexity – Process, Who Is Responsible… Effective communication is difficult • E-mail per day • Attention span measured in seconds, not minutes • Text messages, Tweets, Instant Messaging, and ??? What’s the priority vs. my “real” responsibilities? Did we reach everybody? In the context of their daily job* • 15% understand legal holds • 21% understand records retention 7 * Source: 2008 Kahn Consulting
    • Best Practice e-Discovery EDRM - Electronic Discovery Reference Model Legal Responsibilities IT Responsibilities 8
    • Information Sources Order Business management, “Structured data” applications inventory, financial, etc. Communication and E-mail, Outlook, “Semi-structured collaboration SharePoint, etc. data” tools Microsoft Word, “Unstructured End user tools Excel, Adobe data” Photoshop, etc. 9
    • Where’s the Data You Need? Offline Storage Cloud Stored Identification 10
    • HP’s Perspective: Changing the eDiscovery Focus Lower the costs • Approaching “Tsunami” Increase efficiency • Repeatable process Mitigate Risk • Litigation-ready foundation People, Process and Technology together are the solution…. 11
    • Phillip M. Adams & Assoc., LLC v. Dell, 2009 WL 910801 (D. Utah Mar. 30, 2009) – Plaintiff alleged that ASUS Computer International “reverse engineered” his patented solution to floppy drive data loss – ASUS produced virtually no evidence supporting its claim that it invented its solution independently– claiming it simply did not retain records very long – Magistrate Judge David Nuffer ruled that ASUS’s “lack of a retention policy and irresponsible data retention practices…” Violated Rights 12
    • Phillip M. Adams & Assoc., LLC v. Dell, Inc., 2009 WL 910801 (D. Utah Mar. 30, 2009) Issue: When did the duty to preserve arise and were defendants culpable for loss of data? Holding: Duty to preserve arose based on industry environment, including litigation on similar issues; culpability was “founded in [defendant’s] questionable information management practices.” 13 ?
    • 14
    • 15
    • 16
    • Keithley v., Inc., 2008 WL 3833384 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 12, 2008) – In this patent infringement case the plaintiff requested terminating sanctions for the Defendants failure to produce evidence. – Magistrate Judge Elizabeth LaPorte found that the Defendant made misrepresentations to the plaintiff and the court, failed to do an adequate search and production initially, and was liable for some spoliation of evidence, particularly source code 17
    • Keithley v., Inc., 2008 WL 3833384 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 12, 2008) Issue: What sanctions were appropriate for “egregious” discovery violations? Holding: “The facts – specifically that Defendants have no written document retention policy nor was there a specific litigation hold put in place. That at least some evidence was destroyed…that defendant made material misrepresentations to the Court and Plaintiffs…and that Defendants have produced an avalanche of responsive… information only after the court informed the parties that sanctions were appropriate – show a level of reckless disregard for their discovery obligations and for candor and accuracy before the Court sufficient to warrant severe monetary and evidentiary sanctions” 18
    • Magana v. Hyundai Motor America No. 80922-4 (Wash. Supreme Court, Nov. 25, 2009) – Plaintiffs, injured in a car accident with a truck, alleged that their injuries were partially caused by a design defect in their 1996 Hyundai accent. – Hyundai initially refused to produce records relating to other failures of allegedly similar seatback designs. – Some such records were not preserved. 19
    • Magana v. Hyundai Motor America No. 80922-4 (Wash. Supreme Court, Nov. 25, 2009) – “Hyundai had the obligation not only to diligently and in good faith respond to discovery efforts, but to maintain a document retrieval system that would enable the corporation to respond to plaintiff’s requests.” – “Hyundai is a sophisticated multinational corporation, experienced in litigation.” – Wash Supreme Court held trial court acted “well within its discretion” in entering $8 million default judgment plus fees against Hyundai 20
    • Public Perceptions of Big Companies 21
    • Three Keys for eDiscovery Pre-litigation Readiness is Key: Make sure you have an adequate written document retention policy and archiving system Be prepared ahead of time with litigation hold procedures that can be quickly and easily implemented when needed Upon anticipation of litigation, or litigation, be sure to preserve and be prepared to produce all relevant records on a timely basis 22
    • – Subtitle goes here Proactive Steps for Litigation Readiness 23
    • Infinite Retention It’s worked so far!! ??? It’s easy Disk is cheap Lack of awareness Lack of solutions 24
    • Disks May Be Cheap Infinite Retention is Not Runaway IT Spend Diminished End User Increased Risk Productivity Inability to meet regulatory Personnel Performance, Storage, Personnel, … Performance Performance, search, e-Discovery compliance / e-Discovery replication, … obligations Energy Backup Governance Cooling Recovery Compliance Floor Space Replication Risk 25
    • We Can Not Spend Our Way Out of this 26
    • What do I have? …what do I keep? …for how long? INFORMATION GOVERNANCE Inventory, Analysis, Classification, Archiving, e-Discovery and Records Management 27
    • Are These Important to the Organization? Objects without context = not important Record Collection A rock The paper Record the painting with now has context to the recorded context, activity that the context is a authenticated object was record and is dated used for The email is a record 28
    • Structured vs. Unstructured Data eDiscovery pain points • Identification of responsive data relies on select business users Structured data: • Legal hold happens at the application level • Infinite hold on applications? Structured Data eDiscovery • Rely on a large number of users expenses are IT & Unstructured data: • Need to “collect” in order to “preserve” user costs for • Large amount of duplicate data Identification, Collection and Legal Hold Unstructured Data Costs are for Processing, Analysis and Review 29
    • Record Lifespan in a Business Application 3 Entire application subject to legal hold Business application 1 $$$$$$$$$$ Business Lawsuit complete Non -changeable Audit Expiration Creation Disposition Business Value eligible Business users 2 4 IT RISK and Time LIABILITY 30
    • Software Solutions Standard Filtering, Deduping and Review Elimination of Exact Duplicates 100% 100% Conversion 92% 90 80 Manual Review Volume of Documents 70 60 50 Detailed Review & Analysis 40 30 Production 20 Document 10% 10 Collection Initial Review 5% 0 Start (Time) Finish Software Enhanced Filtering, Deduping and Review 100% Redundancy Suppression 100% 90 Savings 80 78% Volume of Documents 70 Document Mapping 60 50 Detailed Review & Analysis 40 30 Production Conversion 20 Document 10% Collection Initial Review 5% 10 0Start (Time) Finish Trial Counsel Oversight 31
    • Managing Complexity Automation opportunities to reduce costs Legal Discovery Process Chain Litigation/ Process Audit Preservation, Identification Collection Review Production Ready Analysis Infrastructure Records, archiving, & search infrastructure choices will: Volume of responsive data – Impact the initial volume of responsive data. – Enable companies to rapidly prepare for “meet and confer.” – Facilitate operational efficiencies – Drive a repeatable and defensible process Relevance to investigation 32
    • HP Solutions for Best Practice E-discovery Capture, classify, preserve, discover, and analyze information faster Document and records management with HP TRIM Compliance archiving with HP IAP (Integrated Archive Platform) Legal analytics with Clearwell Systems 33
    • Document and Records Management Manage information faster with HP TRIM software Key Benefits • Apply compliance policy management across the enterprise • Prove authenticity with version/access control and audit trails • Reduce risk with global cert. standards and best practices • Manage physical content with the same rigor as ESI • Establish and enforce a security structure that automatically governs how workers use information Key Capabilities • Seamless integration with MS Office and SharePoint enables easy capture, updating and reuse of business information • Integrate business and vertical applications with a built-in software development kit (SDK) and Web Services 34
    • Record lifespan with HP Structured Records Management Solution Application subject 2 Records Management system supports legal hold to legal hold 1 5 Business Application Records Management System $$$$$$$$$$ Business Lawsuit Complete Deferred Non Changeable Delete Audit Expiration Creation Business Value Disposition Eligible 4 3 Legal / Records Managers REDUCED Business Users IT RISK/LIABILITY 35 Time
    • Compliance Archiving Discover information faster with HP Integrated Archive Platform (IAP) Key Benefits • Control information retention within a centrally-managed, searchable archive solution • Focus data analysis/processing on the right data set(s) • Establish and demonstrate an immutable audit trail • Reduce the need to bring in consultants to assist e-discovery searches • Manage email with continuous capture, control and protection Key Capabilities • Set automated data retention and destruction polices • Quarantine search results for indefinite periods • Export quarantined and archived data to legal analytics tools • Encryption, WORM capability, and digital signatures • Restrict access and search to authorized personnel 36
    • Legal Analytics Analyze information faster with Clearwell Key Benefits • Gain a new level of visibility across all matters • Decrease costs up to 90% • Reduce review time from months to hours • Get up and running < 25 min (turnkey appliance) Key Capabilities • Proven, seamless integration with HP IAP • Enterprise-class e-discovery management • Simple and intuitive UI for early case assessment • Industry-leading document processing performance • Advanced culling, filtering, and analysis • Rapid reviewing, tagging, and exporting • Productivity tracking and reporting 37
    • Benefits of HP Solutions for eDiscovery • Eliminate unneeded data Lower • Structured & unstructured the costs data • Asset for the knowledge Increase worker efficiency • Centralized access • Enforce retention times Mitigate • Immutable audit trail Risk 38
    • eDiscovery Maturity Model Organization Characteristics Optimizing cost & efficiency •Can’t use to improve business insight •Legal analysis & cost andsearches are difficult & time consuming Optimizing contextual efficiency Proactive Administered Centrally •Proactive identification of relevant information is inaccurate e-Discovery •Identification & preservation centrally managed •Integrating business processes and RM is difficult •Lack of expertise defensible discovery process •Repeatable, in defining optimal risk/reward tradeoff & a master strategy / deployment plan •Interested in extending technologies into business insight Defining & deploying a basic capabilities Mixed Reactive •No ability to leverage legal knowledge base Automation Defining and deploying a basic capabilities Proactive Hybrid •Cannot accurately do early case assessment •Preservationof legal, hold) process & compliance requirements •Aware (litigation regulatory, impacts business e-Discovery •Preservation process does not guarantee integrity of evidence •Collectiontaken basicis still manual and ad-hoc •Have of evidence steps to address e-Discovery readiness •Identification of custodians & lower costs & costly •Have identified where evidence is too risk further • Admitting there is a problem Manual Processes Admitting there is a problem • Evidence authenticity cannot be proven Reactive • Low quality evidence drives extremely highof your business risk •Don’t have a clear understanding legal analysis fees e-Discovery • Difficult & costly to determine information custodians • IP leakagea lot of money on legal fees •Spend / loss is continuously occurring • Process is not defensible in a court of law •Duplication of work • Non-repeatable ad-hoc process when respond to subpoenas • Little understanding of relevant regulations & business risk 39
    • “What is the one thing I have that my competitors do not have? What can I invest in that my competitors cannot replicate? Information. It’s the new competitive edge.” Source: “The Value Factor,” by Mark Hurd & Lora Nyberg 40
    • IM Transformation Experience Workshop: Your first step to a successful Information Management execution Location: at customer premises or HP Invent Center Duration: half day Content: practical, structured, PowerPoint free Attendees: customer CxO, HP senior consultants Enrolment: Via assessment questionnaire Main objectives •Define your IM needs in a structured way •Establish where you are / will go on your IM roadmap •Provide templates, examples and “how to” advice •Give immediate value, leave behind a report •Ensure follow up with the same resources in the room For more information •Please contact you HP account manager. 41
    • For More Information… The new HP Information Management Digital Hub • Discussions • Best Practices • Reviews & More • Contact us 42
    • Q&A 43
    • To learn more on this topic, and to connect with your peers after the conference, visit the HP Software Solutions Community: 44 ©2010 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.
    • 45