EDD: Issues, Law, and Solutions: eDiscovery Solutions Group Announces Support for Equivio Near-Duplicates and email Thread Management

Thursday, July 9, 2009

eDiscovery Solutions Group Announces Support for Equivio Near-Duplicates and email Thread Management

eDiscovery Solutions Group has announced that it has entered in to a partnership with Equivio to provide comprehensive consulting, training and systems integration support for Equivio’s near-duplicates and email threads technology.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PRLog (Press Release) – Jun 30, 2009 – eDiscovery Solutions Group - announced today that it has entered in to a partnership with Equivio to provide comprehensive consulting, training and systems integration support for Equivio’s near-duplicates and email threads technology.

Equivio’s grouping, analysis and management of near-duplicates and email threads enable litigation knowledge workers to easily identify and skip redundant data and focus exclusively on the unique information in each document. Equivio reduces the risk of missing key information, ensures a consistent approach across the entire data set, enhances review productivity and reduces the amount of time required for litigation knowledge workers to meet tight deadlines.

Under the terms of the partnership, eDiscovery Solutions Group professionals -including Superior Document Services - and certified consortium members will be available to assist Equivio clients with comprehensive eDiscovery consulting, document review best practices and end-user training for leading industry document management platforms such as Concordance, Summation, Ringtail, iConect, Relativity, CaseCentral and CaseLogistix. In addition, eDiscovery Solutions Group technologists and certified consortium members will be available to assist software vendors with integrating Equivio into commercial product lines and end users with integrating Equivio into internal legacy systems.

eDiscovery Solutions Group will also begin selling Equivio as a component of its eDiscovery services, consulting and technology offering designed to support the entire eDiscovery lifecycle for the legal departments of corporations, the IT departments of corporations that need to support eDiscovery requirements, and litigation-centric law firms.

“In today's complex corporate reality of managing ever increasing volumes of Electronically Stored Information (ESI) and changing eDiscovery demands, the cost of document review is the single most expensive component of the eDiscovery lifecycle,” states Charles Skamser, Founder, President and CEO of eDiscovery Solutions Group. “We believe that Equivio near–duplicates and email threads technology can have a profound effect on increasing the productivity of litigation knowledge workers, reducing the amount of ESI that has to be reviewed downstream and thereby reducing the overall cost of the entire eDiscovery lifecycle,” continues Mr. Skamser.

eDiscovery Solutions Group offers a broad array of eDiscovery consulting, services and
technology along with project management to support the entire eDiscovery lifecycle. Following the eDiscovery processing parameters of the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM), eDiscovery Solutions Group has developed an eDiscovery best practices framework that includes consulting, collection, analysis, processing, production, review and presentation.

Within this framework, the eDiscovery Solutions Group can deliver data retention policy,
development, data archiving, eSecurity, eCompliance, eDiscovery readiness, strategic planning, implementation support, paper and ESI collection, investigations, expert testimony, data recovery, computer forensics, early case assessment, data analysis, data redundancy management, conceptual search, de-dupe, near de-dupe, scanning, copying, coding, language translation, EDD, TIFF conversion, hosting, on-site, on-shore and off-shore review, legal process outsourcing (LPO), courtroom graphics and presentations, tool training, systems integration and custom solutions.

“As our installed base continues to grow, we are very pleased to have eDiscovery Solutions
Group as a partner to assist with providing review consulting, training end-users and providing systems integration for our clients,“ stated Amir Milo, CEO of Equivio. “eDiscovery Solutions Group staff of experienced eDiscovery professionals, along with their network of consortium members, will be a welcome addition to the Equivio community

eDiscovery Solutions Group is an international consortium of leading independent eDiscovery consultants, eDiscovery consulting firms, regional litigation service providers and best-in-class eDiscovery technology companies that have come together to provide all of the services, consulting and technology necessary to support the entire eDiscovery lifecycle for the legal departments of corporations, the IT departments of corporations that need to support eDiscovery requirements and litigation centric law firms. For more information about eDiscovery Solutions Group, please visit: http://www.ediscoverysolutionsgroup.com/.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Sedona Principles 2nd ed.

1. Electronically stored information is potentially discoverable under Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 or its state equivalents. Organizations must properly preserve electronically stored information that can reasonably be anticipated to be relevant to litigation.
2. When balancing the cost, burden, and need for electronically stored information, courts and parties should apply the proportionality standard embodied in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(C) and its state equivalents, which require consideration of the technological feasibility and realistic costs of preserving, retrieving, reviewing, and producing electronically stored information, as well as the nature of the litigation and the amount in controversy.
3. Parties should confer early in discovery regarding the preservation and production of electronically stored information when these matters are at issue in the litigation and seek to agree on the scope of each party’s rights and responsibilities.
4. Discovery requests for electronically stored information should be as clear as possible, while responses and objections to discovery should disclose the scope and limits of the production.
5. The obligation to preserve electronically stored information requires reasonable and good faith efforts to retain information that may be relevant to pending or threatened litigation. However, it is unreasonable to expect parties to take every conceivable step to preserve all potentially relevant electronically stored information.
6. Responding parties are best situated to evaluate the procedures, methodologies, and technologies appropriate for preserving and producing their own electronically stored information.
7. The requesting party has the burden on a motion to compel to show that the responding party’s steps to preserve and produce relevant electronically stored information were inadequate.
8. The primary source of electronically stored information for production should be active data and information. Resort to disaster recovery backup tapes and other sources of electronically stored information that are not reasonably accessible requires the requesting party to demonstrate need and relevance that outweigh the costs and burdens of retrieving and processing the electronically stored information from such sources, including the disruption of business and information management activities.
9. Absent a showing of special need and relevance, a responding party should not be required to preserve, review, or produce deleted, shadowed, fragmented, or residual electronically stored information.
10. A responding party should follow reasonable procedures to protect privileges and objections in connection with the production of electronically stored information.
11. A responding party may satisfy its good faith obligation to preserve and produce relevant electronically stored information by using electronic tools and processes, such as data sampling, searching, or the use of selection criteria, to identify data reasonably likely to contain relevant information.
12. Absent party agreement or court order specifying the form or forms of production, production should be made in the form or forms in which the information is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form, taking into account the need to produce reasonably accessible metadata that will enable the receiving party to have the same ability to access, search, and display the information as the producing party where appropriate or necessary in light of the nature of the information and the needs of the case.
13. Absent a specific objection, party agreement or court order, the reasonable costs of retrieving and reviewing electronically stored information should be borne by the responding party, unless the information sought is not reasonably available to the responding party in the ordinary course of business. If the information sought is not reasonably available to the responding party in the ordinary course of business, then, absent special circumstances, the costs of retrieving and reviewing such electronic information may be shared by or shifted to the requesting party.
14. Sanctions, including spoliation ﬁndings, should be considered by the court only if it finds that there was a clear duty to preserve, a culpable failure to preserve and produce relevant electronically stored information, and a reasonable probability that the loss of the evidence has materially prejudiced the adverse party.
Copyright © 2007 The Sedona Conference®. All Rights Reserved.
Reprinted courtesy of The Sedona Conference®.
Go to http://www.thesedonaconference.org/ to download a free copy of the complete document for your personal use only.