May 7th 2 pm predictive coding recommind - litigation

Predictive Coding and The Return on

Investment (ROI) of Advanced Review

Strategies in eDiscovery

Drew Lewis eDiscovery Counsel

AGENDA

A Predictive Coding Primer

Predictive Coding and Market Trends

Predictive Coding in Court

Selecting the Right Technology for the Job: Common Use Cases

The ROI of Predictive Coding

The “Hidden” ROI: Strategic Advantages of Technology

THE RECOMMIND STORY

• Founded 2000 • San Francisco (HQ),

Boston, New York, London, Sydney & Bonn

• #163 in Deloitte’s 2012 Technology Fast 500TM

• #10 in Fast Company’s 2013 Most Innovative Companies in Big Data

PREDICTIVE CODING 101

PREDICTIVE CODING DEFINED

People Case Experts

Reviewers

Technology Keyword agnostic analytics

Iterative machine learning

Process Principled, Measured, and Defensible

Statistically certain results

PREDICTIVE CODING BASICS

PREDICTIVE CODING OUTPUTS

Iteration Total Docs Computer Suggested

Percentage Suggested

Docs Reviewed Percentage Reviewed

Responsive Docs

Percentage Responsive of Docs Reviewed

1 948,271 3172 0.335% 3,172 0.33% 2,063 65.04%

2 948,271 1313 0.138% 1,313 0.14% 1,029 78.37%

3 948,271 636 0.067% 636 0.07% 421 66.19%

4 948,271 290 0.031% 290 0.03% 176 60.69%

5 948,271 5039 0.531% 5,039 0.53% 4,671 92.70%

6 948,271 1428 0.151% 1,428 0.15% 1,143 80.04%

7 948,271 687 0.072% 687 0.07% 540 78.60%

8 948,271 2270 0.239% 2,270 0.24% 1,983 87.36%

MARKET TRENDS

MASSIVE GROWTH OF UNSTRUCTURED

CONTENT

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Exab

yte

s

Structured Data Unstructured Data

Worldwide Corporate Data Growth

Source: IDC. The Digital Universe 2010

80% of Data Growth is Unstructured

CURRENT TRENDS IN-HOUSE

Regulatory/Compliance Litigation: UP

Employment Litigation: UP

Legal Budgets: DOWN

Number one concern: Doing more with

less*

Three most important qualities for outside

counsel*:

˗ Responsiveness

˗ Budget

˗ Speed of work

* Source: ALM Corporate Counsel: Agenda 2013

CURRENT TRENDS

Majority of companies have used

predictive coding

Another 1/3 of companies considering

using predictive coding

Most use is “experimental” – less than

15% “systematic” use

* Source: eDJ Group’s Q1 2013 Predictive Coding Survey, February 2013

JUDICIAL TRENDS

PREDICTIVE CODING’S HOLY TRINITY

In re Actos (Pioglitazone)Products Liability Litigation

(W.D. La. July 27, 2012)

Da Silva Moore v. Publicas Groupe SA, (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 24, 2012)

Kleen Products LLC v. Packaging Corp. of Am. (N.D. III. Sept. 28, 2012)

PREDICTIVE CODING GAINING GROUND

EORHB, Inc., et al. v HOA Holdings, Inc., et. al. (Del. Ch. Ct. Oct 15,

2012)

Robocast, Inc. v. Apple, Inc. (D. Del. 2012)

Chevron Corp v. Donnziger (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 15, 2013)

Harris v. Subcontracting Concepts, LLC (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 11 2013)

COMMON USE CASES

THE RIGHT TECHNOLOGY FOR THE JOB

What is the problem you need to solve?

Expenses

Efficiency

Understand of data

Confidential data

Technology procurement should account for as many problems with as

few solutions when possible

•Check existing coding

•Confirming defensibility

Quality Control

•Hunt for smoking gun

•Who said what and when

Hot Doc Identification

• Identify custom document types for special handling

•Source code identification

•Potentially personal information (PPI)

Custom Use Cases

•Prioritize

•Minimize review population

•Confirm defensibility

Responsive Review

• Internal or regulatory investigation

• Identify potential topics and key facts

• Identify key docs in opposing counsel production

Investigative Workflow

THE ROI OF PREDICTIVE

CODING

CASE STUDY

Initial Review (linear):

33% cull rate (reduced to 68 GB)

679,349 documents for review

Approximately 47.5 decisions/hr.

14,302.1 hours needed for review

Contractor rate of $55/hr. (first

pass only)

$786,641.63 for first pass review

CASE STUDY (Cont’d)

Second Review (Predictive Coding):

92% cull rate (reduced to 17 GB)

22% reviewed

Approximately 32.5 decisions/hr.

1150.8 hours needed for

complete review (less validation

phase)

SME rate $500/hr.

$575,384.62 for Complete Review SAVINGS: $211,983.81

THE “HIDDEN” ROI

STRATEGIC THINKING

Increased and better visibility into data set

Increased speed in identification of pertinent documents

Increased level of information and understanding of unreviewed

documents

Increased level of information and understanding of document content

without granular document review

Converts reviewers into knowledge workers

QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION