On Predictive Coding – A JD Supra e-Discovery Reader

The day when robots start doing legal work might come sooner than you think…

Joanne Lee, Foley & Lardner

As e-Discovery grows in importance and complexity, many are convinced that predictive coding will revolutionize the industry. For your reference, here’s a look at how predictive coding works, as well as its growing acceptance in the community and promised advantages:

How it Works

Predictive Coding Comes of Age – Quinn Emanuel

“Predictive coding is the latest evolution of computer-assisted document searching. As with manual and keyword searching, the process begins by collecting a corpus of potentially responsive documents from the client. Next, attorneys review a small set of randomly selected documents to identify a ‘seed set’ of documents that are clearly fitting, or not fitting, the desired document categories. Then, the predictive coding software uses the ‘seed’ documents to create a template to use when screening new documents. Some systems produce a simple yes/no, while others assign a score (for example, on a 0 to 100 basis) relating to responsiveness or privilege. Attorneys then audit the identified documents to validate their relevance, responsiveness, or privilege. The computer uses the attorneys’ audit results to modify its search algorithm. The search algorithm is repeatedly audited and rerun until the system’s predictions and the reviewer’s audits sufficiently coincide. Typically, the senior lawyer (or team) needs to review only a few thousand documents to train the computer, at which point the system has learned enough to make confident predictions on a much larger data set—relevance of millions of documents” Read on>>

What Lawyers Must Know About Technology Assisted Review – Spillman Thomas

“In the eDiscovery community, Technology Assisted Review (TAR) is the most talked about subject of 2011-2012. TAR is a marketing term used interchangeably with ‘predictive coding,’ ‘machine assisted review,’ ‘computer assisted review,’ and ‘meaning based computing.’ Yes, technology has advanced to the point that, with training, it literally can think for you. Putting it in the simplest terms, senior level attorneys review documents selected by the computer, make a determination about each document’s relevance, inform the computer of those determinations, and the computer ‘learns’ how to identify similar documents and exclude dissimilar ones. With the ever increasing volumes of electronically stored information (ESI) in existence today, it would appear to be a document review team’s dream come true. Fueled by vendors who are eager to sell their products and services, clients who are demanding more efficiency, and now endorsements by members of the Federal judiciary, the buzz around TAR has reached a state of frenzy” Read on>>


Increasing Judicial Acceptance of Computer-Assisted Document Review – White & Case LLP

“In recent months, three different courts have considered the use of computer assisted review of documents to select relevant materials for production in connection with litigation. The decisions by two of these courts approving the use of computer-assisted review technology are indicative of an overall trend in both state and federal courts towards greater automation of the discovery process. Given the vast amounts of electronic data currently generated by businesses of all sizes, we expect this trend to continue and the implications of these decisions to be significant…” Read on>>

Delaware Chancellery Court Sua Sponte Orders Parties to Use Predictive Coding – Orrick

“On October 15, 2012, Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster of the Delaware Court of Chancellery ordered the parties in EORHB, Inc., et al. v. HOA Holdings, Inc., et al., Case No. 7409-VCL (Del. Ch. Ct. Oct. 15, 2012) to utilize predictive coding technology for their document review and productions or else show cause why the use of predictive coding was not appropriate. (See 10/15/2012 Tr. at pp. 66-67.)

The court ordered the parties to locate a single eDiscovery provider that had the capability to separately house documents collected by both sides. Should the parties not be able to agree on a single provider, the court asked that each side submit names of its preferred vendors so that the court could select one. In issuing this order, the court cited a desire to spare the parties from spending hours manually reviewing documents…” Read on>>

SDNY Denies Motion for Recusal or Disqualification of Judge Peck in Da Silva Moore – Cullen and Dykman

“After discussing the Second Circuit’s legal standards for recusal and judge disqualification, the Court focused on the fact that Magistrate Judge Peck is considered “one of [the Second Circuit’s] experts in e-discovery” and his decision to have the parties adopt a protocol for e-discovery including the use of predictive coding was not motivated by bias… ” Read on>>


A New Discovery — How leveraging e-discovery tools can reduce the time and money spent on a lawsuit – RMKB

“Cases today can require gigabytes or terabytes of information to be reviewed for responsive documents to be produced in litigation and ultimately narrowed further to several hundred or thousand pages that you will actually use as exhibits at trial. First and foremost, you have to narrow the universe of information that your attorney reviews because attorney rates of $200 to $600 per hour drive the cost of litigation. Predictive coding can narrow attorney review time from months to weeks or even days; time is money and volume is time…” Read on>>

Reining In Discovery Costs Through Predictive Coding Programs – Schnader

” Studies have shown that predictive coding is at once faster and more effective than what has to-date been the gold standard in discovery — human review and keyword searching. This translates to significant cost savings for the client because less attorney time is needed to review a smaller, more targeted set of documents…” Read on>>

[Video: Predictive Coding’s ROI Outpaces Other Processes Even As Technology Costs Rise – LXBN]

Read additional articles on predictive coding at JD Supra>>