• Ask Catalyst: A User's Guide to TAR

    Download TAR for Smart People

    Your Questions Answered About Technology Assisted Review

    By John Tredennick, Jeremy Pickens, Robert Ambrogi, Thomas C. Gricks III & Mark Noel

    At Catalyst, we receive many questions about technology assisted review and the workflows related to our advanced TAR 2.0 platform (Insight Predict) and its continuous learning algorithm. Other questions address generic TAR topics. Your questions were so good that we thought it would be useful to compile them and our answers into a book for handy reference. We hope you find it useful.

    Get Full E-Book >>




  • Contextual Diversity

    Continuous Active Exploration of Information

  • Continuous Active Learning

    How It Works and Why It Matters to Legal Professionals

  • How a Major Bank Saved 94% on E-Discovery Review Costs

    View as PDF


  • Managed Review

    Download ProductGuide Managed Review

    Cut Review Costs through Expertise and Advanced Technology

    As review costs rise, corporations and their counsel increasingly look to integrate the latest machine-learning technology into the review process. Catalyst Managed Review combines the best of both: an award-winning search, analytics and review platform backed by experienced review managers and Insight-trained reviewers to provide cost-effective document review.

    Read Full PDF >>



  • Multi-Matter Repository

    View as PDF


  • Predict Proves Effective for Small Collection

    Download Predict Proves Effective for Small Collection

    Facing Tight Deadline in SEC Probe, Company Reduces Review by 75%

    The question has persisted since technology assisted review got its start. How big does a case need to be before it makes sense to load it into a TAR system? Is 10,000 documents enough? How about 100,000? In this case, it was just 16,000 documents, but TAR enabled the company to cut its review by 75% and get it done in under a week.

    Read Full Case Study >>



  • Regulatory Agency Cuts Review by 60%

    Insight Predict Helps a Small Team Meet a Tight Discovery Deadline

    Download Regulatory Agency Cuts Review by 60

    When the regulatory agency sued the private company, it sought to recover over $1 million the company had allegedly overbilled the government. But when the short-staffed agency faced a tight discovery deadline in the case, it knew there was not time for manual review. Turning to Insight Predict, Catalyst’s second-generation technology assisted review (TAR) platform, the agency was able to cut its review nearly 60%.

    Read Full Case Study >>

  • Solving the Transparency Issues in Technology Assisted Review

    This webinar is a component of our comprehensive Practice Makes Perfect educational series.

    Technology assisted review (TAR) offers immense savings in both time and review costs, but many attorneys hesitate to use it because of concerns about "transparency" in the process.

    Specifically, when a party wants to use TAR in litigation, the opposing party often insists as a prerequisite that counsel agree to disclose the TAR process they use and which documents they use for training. If the parties are unable to agree on the transparency issue, they sometimes turn to the court to decide it. Courts are split on how they rule on this issue, sometimes even requiring opposing counsel to directly participate in the training.

    Attorneys worry that this kind of transparency will force them to reveal work product, thoughts about problem documents, or even case strategy. Although most attorneys accept the requirement to share keyword searches as a condition of using them, disclosing their TAR training documents in conjunction with a production seems a step too far.


    However, by using a TAR 2.0 process that employs Continuous Active Learning, the transparency issue is minimized or even eliminated, as U.S. Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Peck acknowledged in his recent decision in Rio Tinto PLC v. Vale SA: “If the TAR methodology uses ‘continuous active learning’ … the contents of the seed set is much less significant."

    In this webinar, learn how TAR 2.0 solves the transparency issue. We will discuss:

    • The history of TAR and transparency concerns
    • Recent case law on transparency
    • Why transparency is important in TAR 1.0
    • Why transparency is irrelevant with TAR 2.0
    • Simple ways to validate with little or no transparency
    • What’s in store for 2016


    Bob AmbrogiRobert Ambrogi, Esq.
    A lawyer and veteran legal journalist, Bob serves as Catalyst’s director of communications. He is also a practicing lawyer in Massachusetts and is the former editor-in-chief of The National Law Journal, Lawyers USA and Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly. A fellow of the College of Law Practice Management, he writes the award-winning blog LawSites and co-hosts the legal-affairs podcast Lawyer2Lawyer. He is a regular contributor to the ABA Journal and is vice chair of the editorial board of the ABA’s Law Practice magazine.

    Our speakers:

    John Tredennick

    John Tredennick, CEO and Founder, Catalyst
    John is a former trial lawyer and litigation partner with a large national law firm, and has written or edited five books and countless articles on litigation and technology issues. He was recently named one of the top six e-discovery trailblazers by The American Lawyer. He was also named one of the “Top 100 Global Technology Leaders” by London's CityTech magazine. John served as chair of the ABA Law Practice Management Section and editor-in-chief of its flagship magazine.


    Mark Noel

    Mark Noel, Managing Director, Professional Services, Catalyst
    Mark specializes in helping clients use technology assisted review, advanced analytics, and custom workflows to handle complex and large-scale litigations. Before joining Catalyst, Mark was a member of the Acuity team at FTI Consulting, co-founded an e-discovery software startup, and was an intellectual property litigator with Latham & Watkins LLP.


    Thomas Gricks

    Thomas C. Gricks III, Managing Director, Professional Services, Catalyst
    A prominent e-discovery lawyer and one of the nation's leading authorities on the use of TAR in litigation, Tom joined Catalyst in June. He advises corporations and law firms on best practices for applying Catalyst’s TAR technology, Insight Predict, to reduce the time and cost of discovery. He has more than 25 years’ experience as a trial lawyer and in-house counsel, most recently with the law firm Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis, where he was a partner and chair of the e-Discovery Practice Group.

  • TAR 101 With John Tredennick

    An Introduction for Legal Professionals

  • TAR for Smart People

    Download TAR for Smart People

    Expanded and Updated Seconded Edition

    How Technology Assisted Review Works & Why it Matters for Legal Professionals

    By John Tredennick, Mark Noel, Jeremy Pickens, Robert Ambrogi & Thomas C. Gricks III

    Technology Assisted Review has been a game changer for e-discovery professionals, offering dramatic savings in both time and review costs for savvy clients and their legal counsel. This book confronts the difficult issues with the first generation of TAR applications, while showcasing the newer, more advanced protocols coming with TAR 2.0.

    Get Full E-Book >>




  • Three Categories of Search in Discovery

    Each has Different Measures for Determining Success

About Catalyst

Catalyst designs, builds and hosts the world’s fastest and most powerful document repositories for large-scale discovery and regulatory compliance. We back our technology with a highly skilled Professional Services team and a global partner network to ensure the best e-discovery experience possible.
Catalyst Repository Systems

1860 Blake Street, 7th Floor
Denver, CO 80202

Phone: 303.824.0900 | Toll Free: 877.557.4273
Fax: 303.293.9073

info@catalystsecure.com |  Privacy PolicyPrivacy Shield


.@CatalystSecure chief scientist @jerepick to speak Friday at the Rochester Institute of Technology: https://t.co/BAJ5tVa2Gt#RITNews

Technology helping to protect corporations against Foreign Corrupt Practices Act fines? Read more here… https://t.co/oPeHSSzlze