Contact Us: 800.401.7809 x22

View ‘Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production’ On-Demand

webinar image

Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production

DESCRIPTION
Increasing volumes of electronically stored information (ESI) in litigation have created the need for faster and more effective review procedures, software, and systems. Larger cases mean that ‘eyes on’ linear review of all documents just isn’t possible sometimes. Document-intensive matters require consideration and adoption of technology-enhanced approaches to leverage attorney and staff time in an efficient and effective process. Modern technology-enhanced review tools maximize attorney review time of key evidence, accelerate production timelines, and better control discovery costs.

This webinar will discuss current best practices to streamline and speed review, including improved keyword search, multi-index search, clustering/grouped multi-doc coding, and predictive coding.

PRESENTER
Stu Van Dusen is an eDiscovery solutions consultant with Lexbe, and a frequent speaker and writer on litigation technology. He has his MS Technology Commercialization from UT Austin, and his BS in Business Administration & Management from Trinity University.

COMMENTS ABOUT PREVIOUS WEBINARS
“Excellent presentation! One of the best webinars I have attended!”

“Time well spent.”

“Great in terms of content and presentation. Thanks!”

“Excellent and informative piece!”

“This was one of the most informative webinars I have attended.”

“Good job with the webinar today! Our whole office watched to become more familiar with the litigation eDiscovery process.”

Topics covered include:

  • Document-Intensive Cases & Linear Reviews
  • What are Technology Enhanced Reviews?
  • When Should Technology Enhanced Reviews be Considered?
  • Modern High-Speed Keyword Search
  • Grouping Similar Documents for Grouped Review
  • Uses and Applications of Predictive Coding
  • Summary

To view the webinar, fill out the form at right and you will be redirected.

This Webinar is part of our eDiscovery Webinar Series, with new installments monthly which cover a variety of eDiscovery concepts and Best Practices. You can view any of our past Webinars OnDemand.

Follow Lexbe on LinkedIN to get notice of future installments of the eDiscovery Webinar Series, as well as access to our library of past presentations (video, MP3 and PDF).

Request a complimentary eDiscovery expert consultation, a demo, a free trial or a price quote here.

Slide Text Extract

5. Cases Continue to Grow in Size 5 3 1 2005 2010 2015 2020 Source: IDC Digital Universe Study * 1 Zettabyte = 1 Trillion Gigabytes Zettabytes* Voip Email iPhones Peer-to-Peer Online Storage Digital Cameras Facebook | LinkedIn DropBox | Backup Devices Elastic Storage | SaaS | Google Streets Personal Blogs | Skype | World Satellite Images Personal Scanners | Customer Service Recordings Public Webcams | Google Drive | Netbooks | Cloud Instance Servers | PaaS A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

6. The Challenge of Document-Intensive Cases Decreasing Document Volume Increasing Document Relevance A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

7. Linear Review + Increasing ESI Volumes = High Costs N. Pace and L. Zakaras, “Where the Money Goes: Understanding Litigant Expenditures for Producing Electronic Discovery” (RAND Institute for Civil Justice 2012) CASE STAGE Collection 8% Processing 19% Review 73% Total 100% SOURCE Internal 4% eDisc Providers 26% Outside Counsel 70% Total 100% Best opportunities for further cost savings will be technologies and process improvements that increase attorney review efficiencies. A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

8. What is a Technology Enhanced Review? ● Technology enhanced reviews are those in which additional applications, algorithms, or indexes are applied to a document set in order to support the logical grouping of documents or automatic coding of documents based on some degree of human input. ● Litigators should consider applying these technologies to their review workflows and methodologies when some resource (time, money, or people) is critically constrained on a case. A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

9. Modern Keyword Search ● Early Stage Culling – Reduce amount of ESI to be reviewed by using keywords to cull document collections. ● Keyword-Based Responsive & Privilege Review – Construct search queries to return documents that are likely to be responsive, confidential. Search by name and email of counsel; privilege, work-product, confidential and related keywords. ● ID Documents for Depo Prep – Find and assign key documents related to specific case participants to prepare for depositions. Search by email addresses used, names and nicknames used, important issues associated with deponent. ● ID of Key Docs for Trial – Find and mark key case documents. Code documents that will be needed for trial. A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

10. Modern Keyword Search Benefits ● Fast – Keyword search is very fast compared with other document search methodologies. ● Inexpensive – Good results can be obtained at little cost compared with manual review or other computer assisted methodologies. ● Quality – Search can deliver high quality results, particularly if keyword terms are carefully developed and tested. ● Avoids Manual Review Errors/Inconsistencies – Search results are computer generated, and so avoid known human review errors that can result from fatigue, inadequate training, lack of focus, etc. A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

11. Multi-Index Based Keyword Search Benefits of Multi-Index Approach ● Keyword search is supported best by indexes created from text extracted from Native files (email, attachments, spreadsheets, etc.) and a paginated file converted from Native files into PDF or TIFF and OCRed. ● Most comprehensive approach and minimizes potential of lost data. Index Method Captures Embedded Text Captures Text Excluded From Print Captures Hidden Text Imaged/OCR Yes No No Native Extraction No Yes Yes Lexbe Multi-Index Yes Yes Yes A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

12. Multi-Index Based Keyword Search ● Native extraction will not index embedded body content A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

13. Multi-Index Based Keyword Search ● Image/OCR will not index embedded Speaker’s Notes A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

14. Multi-Index Based Keyword Search ● Multi-Index Approach Captures Everything A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

15. Near Duplicate Detection ● NearDup technology automatically recognizes similar documents within an e-discovery document collection ● Algorithm analyzes, evaluates and compares the actual text content of the documents to each other Unstructured Documents NearDup Groupings A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

16. Near Duplicate Detection There are 4 main applications of NearDup analysis: 1) Grouping similar documents: ● Bunch highly similar documents together for more efficient coding and review 2) Finding hidden ‘key’ or ‘hot’ docs: ● Retrieve and mark unseen documents that have content highly related to existing ‘hot’ or ‘key’ documents 3) Preventing the inadvertent release of privileged information ● Be automatically alerted to files containing similar content to documents that have already been coded as privileged 4) Enable email threading: ● Maintain relationships between email conversations A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

17. NearDup Groupings – Faster Responsive Review Benefits Accelerate document review by batch coding (using multidoc edit) larger groups Increase coding consistency of batched documents Reduce privilege errors A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production

18. NearDup Groupings – Email Threading Benefits View email chains with similar text in date & time order Avoid confusion of emails only tangentially related (<50% text overlap) Consistently code email chains for responsiveness, privilege, attorney-eyes only, etc. A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 19. NearDup Groupings - Preventing Privilege Waiver Benefits Reduce privilege errors Avoid sole reliance on human coding consistency Establish safeguards to help maintain privilege A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 20. ○ Predictive coding allows a skilled reviewer to train a computer algorithm to identify responsive and non- responsive documents in a litigation document collection. ○ As an alternative to manual linear review, predictive coding can drastically reduce the amount of time needed to review increasingly large ESI volumes. What is TAR/Predictive Coding? A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 21. CASE STAGE Collection 8% Processing 19% Review 73% Total 100% ○ Best opportunities for further cost savings will be reducing review costs. ○ Technologies and process improvements, like TAR, reduce costs by increasing attorney review efficiencies Why Use TAR/Predictive Coding? A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 22. Increase Review Speed: TAR is designed to complete review of large ESI collections faster than human reviewers. Applying TAR in a scalable environment maximizes the speed advantage of predictive coding. Decrease Review Costs: Whether paying per document or per hour, TAR is significantly less expensive than exhaustive manual review. Increase Review Quality: Many studies conclude that the presumed quality advantage of ‘gold-standard’ manual review is not accurate. TAR can support defensible, high-quality review outcomes. Why Use TAR/Predictive Coding? A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 23. ○ A randomized sample of ~ 2,400 documents, a seed set, is selected from the collection. ○ A skilled document review professional reviews and codes the seed set. ○ The coding decisions made in reviewing the seed set train the predictive coding algorithm to identify responsive content in the remaining documents. How Does TAR/Predictive Coding Work? A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 24. ○ Iterative samples of 25 computer-reviewed documents, control sets, are inspected for coding algorithm accuracy. ○ The responsiveness designation assigned to the document by the computer is either confirmed or overturned. ○ An F-score - derived from precision and recall measures - indicates the stability of the TAR results. How Does TAR/Predictive Coding Work? A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 25. ○ The TAR algorithm reviews the document collection based on how it was trained during seed set coding and control set review. ○ Remaining Documents are tagged as responsive/non-responsive. ○ The speed at which the document collection is reviewed by the TAR algorithm is largely based on the computing resources applied to the task. How Does TAR/Predictive Coding Work? A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 26. TAR/Predictive Coding results (F-scores) indicate: ○ What proportion of the responsive documents were found by the algorithm within a particular margin of error (recall) ○ What percentage of documents marked responsive are actually responsive within a particular margin of error (precision) Understanding TAR/Predictive Coding Results A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 27. Precision: A measure of how often the algorithm accurately predicts a document to be responsive; the percentage of produced documents that are actually responsive. Recall: A measure of what percentage of the responsive documents in a data set have been classified correctly by the algorithm. F-Score: Harmonic mean of precision and recall. **Note: F1 scores should not to be interpreted as a measure of review quality but rather as an indication of 1) how well the case lends itself to TAR and 2) the quality of the seed set training. Understanding Results: Precision & Recall A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 28. High Recall, High Precision: All of the responsive documents in the collection were appropriately coded by the algorithm (high recall). All of the documents produced are actually responsive (high precision). Best possible outcome. Understanding Results: Precision & Recall A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 29. Low Recall, High Precision: Many of the responsive documents in the collection were not appropriately coded by the algorithm (low recall). However, a high percentage of the documents produced are responsive (high precision). Increased risk of under-producing. Understanding Results: Precision & Recall A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 30. High Recall, Low Precision: All of the responsive documents in the collection have been appropriately tagged by the algorithm (high recall). However, many erroneous documents were incorrectly marked responsive (low precision). Understanding Results: Precision & Recall A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 31. From the Sedona Conference Best Practices Commentary on the Use of Search and Information Retrieval Methods in E-Discovery: “[T]here appears to be a myth that manual review by humans of large amounts of information is as accurate and complete as possible … Even assuming that the profession had the time and resources to continue to conduct manual review of massive sets of electronic data sets (which it does not), the relative efficacy of that approach versus utilizing newly developed automated methods of review remains very much open to debate.” (2007) From the TREC (Text Retrieval Conference) Legal Track: “Overall, the myth that exhaustive manual review is the most effective – and therefore, the most defensible – approach to document review is strongly refuted. Technology-assisted review can (and does) yield more accurate results than exhaustive manual review, with much lower effort...Future work may address which technology-assisted review process(es) will improve most on manual review, not whether technology assisted review can improve on manual review.” (2009) Comparing Outcomes: TAR v. Manual Review A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 32. Defensibility: Without understanding how a particular TAR/predictive coding methodology works, it becomes difficult to explain why the algorithm made certain coding decisions. TAR is No Panacea: TAR is not meant to be used in any and all review situations. Without understanding how a particular TAR/predictive coding methodology works, it is impossible to determine if it is appropriate for your case. The Importance of Transparency A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 33. ○ In TAR, Bayesian Probability models the likelihood of something being true about a document, i.e. responsive, based on the millions of data connections created while training the seed set. ○ A Naive Bayesian Classifier, used in Assisted Review+, is a probability model with assumptions that allow for pattern recognition among multiple independent variables. The Importance of Transparency: Assisted Review+ A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 34. Incoming TAR Project Reviewed Documents ○ Applying more server resources to a TAR/predictive coding task will increase throughput. ○ TAR offers an exponentially faster workflow compared to manual review. Leveraging scalable architectures maximizes the value of this benefit. The Importance of Scalability A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 Faster Document Review & Production 35. ○ TAR/Predictive Coding allows a skilled reviewer to train a computer algorithm to identify responsive and non-responsive documents . ○ You can use TAR/Predictive Coding to increase review speed, decrease review costs, and improve the quality of review results ○ TAR works by teaching a seed set, testing the algorithm against control sets, and applying the improved algorithm to the remainder of the collection ○ Predictive coding performance results are communicated in the form of precision and recall scores ○ It is important to know the underlying logic of the TAR algorithm to interpret, explain, and defend your results. ○ Scalable, transparent predictive coding workflows maximize the intended benefits of technology assisted review. Summary Review A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 36. We’ll be making the following available to webinar attendees: ● A recorded streaming version ● MP3 podcast ● Webinar slide-deck Please let us know if you have any questions or comments about this webinar or suggestions for future topics. This webinar is part of the Lexbe eDiscovery Webinar Series. For notices of future live and on-Demand webinars as part of this series please email us at webinars@lexbe.com or Follow us on LinkedIN. Please contact us with any questions: Thank You For Attending Thank You Speaker Stu VanDusen 800-401-7809 x55 svandusen@lexbe.com Moderator Gene Albert 512-686-3460 gene@lexbe.com A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016 37. Lexbe Sales sales@lexbe.com (800) 401-7809 x22 ‘Cost-effective eDiscovery’ “A powerful litigation document management service” “Because of the Lexbe software, the entire playing field has been leveled for my firm.” ‘Lexbe cost advantages, SaaS convenience and search capabilities appeal to many small firms “Lexbe is the easiest eDiscovery software I have ever used’ ‘Secure, easy-to-use and a great review tool for consideration’ Lexbe eDiscovery Platform Ask Us More About ● The Lexbe eDiscovery Platform, our cloud based processing, review and production tool. Attorney/staff DIY, no users fees or case fees. ● Our high-speed/high-capacity eDiscovery services, and expert professional services. ● Consultations, price quotes, demos and free trials available. A Lawyer’s Guide to Faster Document Review & Production | March 16, 2016

Webinar-Logo-trans-crop

* These fields are required. Any submitted information is kept completely private.

Submit to access immediately

Back to Top