With the ever-increasing volumes of data that corporations are storing, pre-trial e-Discovery costs are becoming absolutely prohibitive without the use of technologies like OrcaTec’s predictive coding.
Atlanta, GA (PRWEB) January 22, 2013
Many corporations already knew that “predictive coding” technology could save them millions of dollars per year on electronic document review in the pre-trial arena known as eDiscovery. But many, if not most, had been waiting to try it until a court okayed the process start to finish.
That affirmation has now occurred. In Global Aerospace Inc. v. Landow Aviation Limited Partnership, et al., No. 61040 in the 20th Judicial Circuit of Virginia’s Loudoun Circuit Court, Judge James Chamblin last month, for the first time in the US, approved the result of an eDiscovery production in which predictive coding had been both ordered and used.
Corporations may now feel significantly more free to use this time and money saving technology to cull the billions of electronic documents they currently send their law firms to review.
Thomas C. Gricks III, chair of the e-Discovery Practice Group at Philadelphia-based Schnader Harrison Segal and Lewis, was the attorney who allegedly persuaded the court first to allow use of predictive coding, and then that his client had done its duty in using the technology (which also saved the client hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney fees).
The opposing party in April had allegedly objected to the use of any Computer-Assisted Review (CAR) to cull the initial 1.3 million document set; an objection that the judge overruled.
Using the OrcaTec Document Decisioning Suite™ for predictive coding, an experienced Schnader litigator was able to allegedly review and code 5,000 random documents from the 1.3 million document collection within a matter of days. Although keywords and seed sets have been discussed in depth in other predictive coding cases, OrcaTec requires neither, thus even further reducing the time for the predictive coding to be run.
Once the coding was completed to the attorney’s satisfaction, OrcaPredict trimmed the document set 83 percent in just a few hours. By significantly reducing the number of documents in this way, Schnader was able to efficiently conduct a more detailed review of the important documents with a team of only five attorneys over a much shorter time period than they would have needed using traditional review. Roughly 173,000 documents of the 1.3 million ultimately were produced to the other side in a tight timeframe.
“Using a traditional manual review process, simply culling the irrelevant documents could have taken as much as 20,000 person-hours and cost more than $1 million,” said OrcaTec’s CTO and Chief Scientist Herbert L. Roitblat, Ph.D.
“The simple answer is it went well,” Gricks told the Wall Street Journal’s Law Blog in a story about the case on Jan. 17. (See How a Computer Did the Work of Many Lawyers.)
Karl Schieneman, president of Review Less and the predictive coding consultant Schnader used on Global Aerospace, believes using CAR is going to be a significant corporate trend, especially in light of this decision. According to the Journal, Schieneman has prepared a survey with the EDJ Group in which 75% of the survey’s respondents are using CAR to cull their electronic documents less than 75% of the time, and some are not culling any documents at all.
“With the ever-increasing volumes of data that corporations are storing, pre-trial e-Discovery costs are becoming absolutely prohibitive without the use of technologies like OrcaTec’s predictive coding,” he said.
To obtain the April order from the Virginia court allowing predictive coding be used, Gricks had allegedly proffered the testimony of several predictive coding experts. Schieneman, Roitblat and Timothy Opsitnick, President of JurInnov in Cleveland, allegedly helped Gricks convince the court that predictive coding would create better, defensible document culling, while providing significant time and cost savings. JurInnov collected and processed an initial 8TB of electronically stored information for Schnader before delivering the 27GB, or 1.3 million documents, to OrcaTec – an initial reduction of more than 99 percent before predictive coding even came into play.
Gricks also alleged, and the court agreed, that there should be a floor for the quality of the predictive coding in order for it to pass muster. Gricks’ client had to show that predictive coding had found at least 75% of all responsive documents in the document set (75% Recall). Human review, also called linear review, is normally 50% or less on Recall.
Upon post-predictive coding testing, OrcaPredict was found to have achieved 81% Recall plus 80% Precision. Precision means that 80% of the documents OrcaPredict predicted would be relevant were found upon review actually to be relevant.
“OrcaTec’s predictive coding has been attaining the Global Aerospace level of Precision and Recall – and even much better – on a very regular basis,” said Roitblat. “You can see on the OrcaTec dashboard the percentage of Precision and Recall you’re achieving as you code. The clients here were aiming for greater than 75%, which is vastly better than human review, and they got 80%. We can’t help but be proud of that.”
While there are other cases allowing or ordering predictive coding or CAR, this is the first time a court has said, essentially, "The way you used predictive coding to cull your data set was fine,“ said Roitblat. “This means corporations can use CAR to quickly and efficiently understand the data they have without waiting a long period of time for manual review to give them access to their own information."
Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP is a law firm of 200 attorneys with offices in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, New York, California, Washington, DC, New Jersey and Delaware. Schnader serves local, national and international clients ranging from large corporations to start-ups and entrepreneurs to individual clients in more than 40 areas of the law. For more information visit http://www.Schnader.com or contact senior communications manager Michael Walsh at 215-751-2061.
Atlanta-based OrcaTec is reinventing eDiscovery by combining all-in-one smarter predictive coding, advanced analytics and Computer-Assisted Review (CAR). Beyond keyword searching, the concept-based OrcaTec Document Decisioning Suite™ takes eDiscovery from data ingestion through document production. See how OrcaTec can cut first-pass review time from weeks or months to just days with demonstrably high levels of accuracy and transparency at http://www.OrcaTec.com, or by calling 888-335-2200 x 2.
About Review Less
Pittsburgh-based Review Less excels in offering predictive coding consulting and designing document review processes that are technically assisted and defensible with tested document reviewers. President Karl Schieneman has been studying predictive coding since 2010, and spends a great deal of his time educating judges and lawyers on its use. For additional information, see http://www.reviewless.com or call 412-992-7526.
Cleveland-based JurInnov is a consulting practice focused on the development of litigation and document management systems, electronic discovery, information security, and computer forensics. JurInnov is an OrcaTec Partner. For more information visit http://www.jurinnov.com or call 877-840-4357.