Category Archives: Uncategorized

Chicago Live Event: Controlling Litigation Costs — Managing Your Legal Department for Success

blog_chicagoCatalyst is teaming up with Bloomberg Law’s Big Law Business to present a complimentary live event in Chicago later this month on how legal departments can successfully manage costs while staying compliant.

The Feb. 23 event features a keynote interview with Susan Lees, general counsel of Allstate Insurance, conducted by Gabe Friedman, editorial manager, Bloomberg BNA. Lees is known as an innovative GC who has effectively led her legal department in controlling costs and increasing risk management. She is expected to discuss how her department uses technology to lower costs while improving transparency and defensibility. Continue reading

Zen and the Art of Simplifying Corporate Discovery

blog_simplify_clouds“To complicate is easy. To simplify is difficult,” said the Italian industrial designer Bruno Munari.

If Munari’s words were a challenge, Catalyst accepted. Last year, Catalyst assembled a team of designers, engineers and legal professionals to build a platform with the overarching goal of simplifying corporate e-discovery.

Two weeks ago, Catalyst unveiled that platform, Insight Enterprise. And in a 12-week series of blog posts, we are focusing in each week on particular aspects of Insight Enterprise and exploring them in more depth. This week, our subject is simplification – how this new platform simplifies corporate e-discovery for in-house counsel. Continue reading

Do You Know How the Latest FRCP Changes Impact E-Discovery?

FRCP_ChangesAmendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure took effect Dec. 1. Do you know how they impact e-discovery?

A year ago at this time, the 2015 FRCP amendments were the talk of the e-discovery community. The revisions relating to discovery were substantial and, in some cases, controversial. But this year’s amendments took effect virtually unnoticed.

That is because this year’s amendments were few in number and minor in effect. However, there is one change that directly affects discovery practice: FRCP Rule 6(d) has been amended to remove service by electronic means from the types of service that give a party an extra three days to respond. Continue reading

Ask Catalyst: If I Use Outside Docs to Train the TAR Algorithm, Do I Risk Exposing Them to My Opponent?

[This is another post in our “Ask Catalyst” series, in which we answer your questions about e-discovery search and review. To learn more and submit your own question, go here.]

We received this question:blog_john_and_tom

Does using documents from other matters to gain intelligence [train the algorithm] run the risk of exposing that data if opposing counsel requests the training set?

Today’s question is answered by John Tredennick, founder and CEO, and Thomas Gricks, managing director of professional services.

Continue reading

Ask Catalyst (Video Edition): How Does TAR Work and Why Does It Matter?

[Editor’s note: This is another post in our “Ask Catalyst” series, in which we answer your questions about e-discovery search and review. To learn more and submit your own question, go here.]  

John TredennickThis week’s question:

How does technology assisted review work and why does TAR matter for legal professionals?

In a special video edition of Ask Catalyst, today’s question is answered by John Tredennick, founder and CEO.

Continue reading

Latest ABA Technology Survey Provides Insights on E-Discovery Trends

Catalyst_Blog_ABA_ReportThe number of law firms involved in cases requiring e-discovery rose in 2016, but many of those firms are failing to use advanced e-discovery technologies or even any e-discovery technology.

These are among the findings of the recently released 2016 Legal Technology Survey Report conducted by the American Bar Association’s Legal Technology Resource Center. The survey examines legal technology usage in a number of areas of law practice, including e-discovery. Continue reading

Data Analytics and the Changing Face of Corporate Compliance

DataEscalating enforcement of anti-corruption laws around the world is driving chief compliance and risk officers to find smarter and more effective ways to monitor compliance programs, and a key way they are doing that is through data analytics, reports Jaclyn Jaeger at Compliance Week (subscription required but free trial available).

But because most compliance departments do not have bottomless budgets, “the wise ones are piggy-backing off technology their companies already employ — like technology-assisted review,” Jaeger writes.

She quotes Mark Noel, managing director of professional services at Catalyst: “People are learning that the same techniques that we use with e-discovery translate and apply to compliance searches.” Continue reading

A Discussion About Dynamo Holdings: Is 43% Recall Enough?

blog_john_and_tomIn September 2014, Judge Ronald L. Buch became the first to sanction the use of technology assisted review (aka predictive coding) in the U.S. Tax Court. See Dynamo Holdings Limited Partnership v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 143 T.C. No. 9. We mentioned it here.

This summer, Judge Buch issued a follow-on order addressing the IRS commissioner’s objections to the outcome of the TAR process, which we chronicled here. In that opinion, he affirmed the petitioner’s TAR process and rejected the commissioner’s challenge that the production was not adequate. In doing so, the judge debunked what he called the two myths of review, namely that human review is the “gold standard” or that any discovery response is or can be perfect. Continue reading

Catalyst’s Chief Scientist Questions Validity of Patent Case Against kCura

Jeremey Pickens

Jeremey Pickens

A small company made big news in the e-discovery world last week when it filed a series of patent infringement lawsuits against kCura, developer of the Relativity search and review platform, and several of kCura’s partners, alleging violation of a patent for concept-based visual presentation of search results.

In addition to kCura, the plaintiff, Blackbird Technologies, has filed separate lawsuits against Innovative Discovery, UnitedLex Corporation, System One Holdings, Advanced Discovery, Xact Data Services, TransPerfect, LDiscoveryand EvD Inc. (now a subsidiary of Ubic.) The lawsuits were all filed June 7 in the U.S. District Court in Delaware. Continue reading

How Many Documents in a Gigabyte: 2016 Edition

How_Many_DocsReaders of our blog will know that I have a continuing interest in answering the perennial e-discovery question: “How many native documents are in a gigabyte?” I started thinking about this in 2011 and published my first article on the subject based on analysis of 18 million files. Challenging industry assumptions, which ran from 5,000 to as many as 15,000, I concluded that the average across all files—based on that sample—was closer to 2,500. Continue reading