SUPERIOR DOCUMENT SERVICES PARTNERS WITH RELATIVITY

Press Release - Richmond Virginia - April 21, 2010 - Superior Document Services, the largest electronic discovery and services provider in Central Virginia, today announced that they have joined the Relativity family as a Premium Hosting Partner and are now offering the document review, analysis and production platform to all of their clients.

In conjunction with Superior’s move to a hosted environment in a world-class data center with a high performance, fully-redundant private network, the addition of Relativity will allow clients to gain more powerful access to their data.

“Relativity is an industry leading document review platform, and as such is a perfect match for Superior’s stated corporate vision,” said Kriss Wilson, president of Superior Document Services. “Our new network infrastructure provides customers with reliable connectivity and fast performance, and will allow them to seamlessly focus on the documents and not the associated technologies.”

“We’re thrilled to welcome Superior Document Services as a Premium Hosting Partner,” said Andrew Sieja, president and CEO of kCura. “By combining their industry expertise with our advanced technology, we’ve created an exceptional partnership that will bring significant time and cost savings to their clients’ review efforts.”

With the addition of Relativity, Superior Document Services now offers a complete suite of hosting solutions to provide clients with the best customized SAS technology for their document review teams. From early case assessment through document production, Superior Document Services is positioned to deliver unmatched value to its clients and partners.

About kCura
kCura are the developers of the e-discovery software Relativity. Relativity is a web-based application servicing the analysis, review and production stages of the EDRM. kCura helps corporations and law firms with e-discovery challenges by installing Relativity on premises, as well as providing hosted on-demand solutions through a global network of partners in Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America. For more information, visit www.kcura.com.

About Superior Document Services
Founded in 1998, Superior Document Services has successfully combined state-of-the-art technology with a detail-oriented commitment to creating a high quality work product. By applying industry-specific expertise to a creative, resourceful, and highly personal business model, Superior has evolved into the largest full-service litigation support company in the Richmond, Norfolk, Virginia Beach and Roanoke, Virginia markets. Its clients include not only Fortune 500 companies, but some of the world’s leading legal, accounting, and consulting firms. For more information about Superior Document Services, please visit www.superiordocumentservices.com.

Press Contacts:

Kriss Wilson
Superior Document Services
(804) 648-2800
kriss@superiordocumentservices.com

Adi Elliott
kCura
(312) 676-5075
aelliott@kcura.com

Controlling Discovery Costs … The Predictive EDISCOVERY Model

Superior Document Services, Richmond VA, an innovative client centric provider of ediscovery and litigation support solutions and services unveils its Predictive EDISCOVERY Model. In response to the growing demands of our corporate and legal clients to quantify the expense of discovery prior to or in anticipation of litigation while not sacrificing quality service Superior was inspired to devise a fixed cost solution to meet the demand.

Superior Document Services EDD and Cormine Intelligent Data partnered to develop an Early Case Assessment (ECA) product. The ECA tool offers ingestion , extraction, analysis, hosting and “first pass” review of up to 1 terabyte of raw data on one data source for less than $12K. Superior receives your electronically stored information on disk and shortly thereafter you receive a web interface and project manager that gives you the power to quickly assess your information and build your case strategy.

Superior’s ECA solution features include:
• DNisting
• Deduplication
• Text Extraction
• Entity Extraction
• Keyword Frequency
• Keyword Suggest
• Keyword Stemming
• Conceptual Search Analytics
• Custom Tagging
• Secure Web Interface
• Export to Linear Review Platform
• Experience!

About Superior Document Services
Superior Document Services has successfully combined state-of-the-art technology with a creative, resourceful, and highly personal business model. The result: a detail-oriented work product of unsurpassed quality. Our clients include not only Fortune 500 companies, but some of the world’s leading legal, accounting, and consulting firms. For more information visit, www.SDSEDD.com

About Cormine Intelligent Data
Cormine Intelligent Data, LLC was founded in 2006 to provide solutions to the commercial and government intelligence community. Our team of software engineers, process engineers, and text analytics experts provide solutions for unique and complex problems using our Zoogma Intelligence Platform. Cormine Intelligent Data is a joint venture between Earl Industries, one of the largest privately owned subcontractors serving the U.S. Navy, and Perfect Commerce, a leader in procurement related services. All Cormine employees maintain an active US security clearance of at least Secret. You can trust us with your sensitive data. For more information visit, www.CORMINEID.com

10 Technologies you can’t afford to ignore in 2010

Stephen Gartner, a writer from CNET’s DeepTech, just posted an article about 10 technologies you can’t afford to ignore in 2010. Head over there and check it out to see which of these technologies you need to capitalize on!

Take your time when in the “Clouds” … Think Defense

.. continued from May 2009 post http://tinyurl.com/cmesul …

1. What lives in your “Cloud”?
2. Where does your “Cloud” hover?
3. What is stated in your “Cloud” EULA?

Lets begin with those simple questions. If the answer includes a stutter or hesitation the discovery phase of litigation just got real expensive.

Listen up (read closely)!

The bleak economy has caused most companies to panic over luxury expenses like new desktops, laptops, servers and storage. The notion of cloud computing is extremely appealing as a form of modern day Technology Outsourcing. Electronic communications and other edata considered Highly Confidential is re-assessed and downgraded to levels that don’t require as much privacy. Privacy that is challenged within the “Cloud”.

Wait how dare one suggest that your “Cloud” is not secure? ….
…. Secure maybe … but definitely not Private and definitely Easily Accessible … definitely Discoverable!!!

Corporations use of external “Cloud” computing and storage should only be limited to normal course of business documents and document templates. This applies to entities where an internal VMware, SBS and/or Email Server setup is not existent or feasible. Thus services from Amazon, Google and Microsoft are appealing as the bright idea light shines a message reading it’s safe to store and manage all corporate data in their stratosphere.

“… their stratosphere” …

The company is provided a block of space with the ability to grant endusers access to the block. Endusers have the permissions to read, edit and publish content within the block via any internet connection. The uptime and maintenance are managed by the block provider. A true convenience and excellent method for reducing costs related to capital expenditures.

Soooo … Where is this “block” of space?; Which server is being accessed that provides and tracks permissions for the corporation to the storage device?; Who is monitoring activity to slow and deter unauthorized intrusions?; When the shared storage is full how is block space reallocated, distributed and made seamless when more is requested?; Should one really be concerned with such a trivial thinking? … Is this a Privacy concern? … Perhaps ….

Hopefully with adding “Cloud” computing and storage solutions to the business process model, the wildly old Veteran IT Professional is still employed (or at least on retainer). Most human beings treat the complexity of “Cloud” computing as a simple brainless way to manage and store edata “however you like”. Which is great, until an investigation ensues.

Investigations are no longer centric to office equipment and storage. In recent years there has been sharp increase in the seizure of endusers “personal” home and portable equipment in response to a corporate investigation. The primary goal of the Investigator is to report on where information was created, when it was created, who the information was shared with and the number (location) of instances for where the information lives. A cumbersome yet fairly straightforward task for the Investigator … except …. today the “Cloud” renders new challenges for Investigators.

When investigating data sources not managed directly by the company nor the enduser, the “Cloud” EULA agreement is critical. Within a matter of seconds the Veteran IT Professional can provide the internal computer architecture Archive & Retention policy as well as the backups if required for the investigation. Investigators are very interested in how data is kept as it gives character and shows trends within the business process model. Most have no working knowledge of how nor when or where their data is being replicated or archived by the “Cloud” provider. There is not any legislation that currently addresses the expected role of the “Cloud” provider to assist/respond in such investigations. Nor are there any standards for accessing and “downloading” data kept within the “Cloud” for preservation and review. Email host (cloud) providers included.

How to prepare for a “Defensible Collection” from the Heavens? … The common sense approach

Collecting eDocs
Investigators, with the Veteran IT Professional, first focus on obtaining access and usage log reports from the “Cloud” provider. If attainable, will present a tenative roadmap depicting the history of when files where published, accessed and modified within the “Cloud”. Second, if attainable, a request of system maintance logs for the corporate “block(s)” from the “Cloud” provider. Third, a directory listing of data stored within the “block”. This is used in the attempt to implore visual logic in the identification of potentially responsive edata, in most cases this is not nearly as effective for data in “blocks”. The system metadata is not reliable thus all of the data needs to be shut off from access to the endusers so the data can be downloaded and preserved for review. Depending on the sensitvity of the case, good lawyering skills and shear volume of data will determine the amount of time the corporation, endusers and “Cloud” will be potentially be crippled. During the course of a typical investigation any unauthorized proprietary information violations are removed before returning collected evidence … This topic alone deserves a separate post for how to permanently remove such edata from within the “Cloud”.

Collecting eMail
Microsoft Outlook is no longer the standard for accessing, downloading and managing web-based email. In the same manner that implementing a Hosted Exchange Server is becoming a standard for businesses as it has become increasingly burdensome to combat spam and the hackers.

The Investigator no longer just ask “where is your exchange server and what is your email retention policy?”. Today it is more concise to ask, “how is email managed?”. Are endusers permitted to access personal webmail through the corporate email client?

In this mobile age the demand from technophytes to have unlimited access to information has birthed FREE resources to meet every need. Especially EMAIL. Internet email giant AOL just within the last 5yrs began offering free screen names in a move to compete with the popularity of Yahoo, Google and Windows Live (the new hotmail). It is predicted that 1 out of every 5 humans has a gmail, aol, hotmail and/or yahoo email account. For the humans that are employed, 3 out of 5 forward business emails to their personal email account as a matter of future reference.

Taking these types of statistics into consideration, the Investigator is required to engage each enduser about their personal email management. Typically IT can’t and doesn’t control or regulate these activities.

“… everyone received and signed the handbook acknowledging the Computer and Internet policy …”

As this trend becomes even more common the need to collect from enduser personal webmail clients becomes a necessary intrusion. The most common forms are POP3 and IMAP mail. The method of analysis and collection will vary for each type of webmail client. The most common collection utility for webmail is to capture (download) to Microsoft Outlook Client and export to a .PST file. The process needs to be recorded in the chain of custody documentation and audited for accuarcy.

In closing for now, in the event your company is considering implementation of “Cloud” computing make certain of these items:

1. Update the Archive and Retention Policy to include the “Cloud”; and
2. Update the Internet and Computer Use Policy to include business emails and transmission of business email including using personal thumb drives.

The author is a supporter of cloud computing and believes that caution must be exercised before one leaps. The opinions are solely those of the author and experiences of the author’s tenure in Legal Discovery.

EFF brief accuses DOJ of “backdoor wiretapping”

In a recent brief by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Department of Justice has been accuse of “backdoor wiretapping” for ordering an ISP to proactively collect a suspect’s e-mails. From here, the DOJ planned to use the Stored Communications Act to subpoena the documents, allowing them to evade the required probable cause.

Ars Technica writes:

In the course of gathering electronic evidence in an investigation, apparently the Justice Department sometimes has trouble telling the difference between a subpoena of “stored communications” and warrantless wiretapping. But it shouldn’t be that hard to distinguish between demanding existing e-mail records from an ISP and ordering an ISP to proactively collect a user’s e-mail over a period of six months so that you can then go back and subpoena the collection. So, the EFF filed an amicus brief in Warshak v. United States to help ensure that the DOJ’s apparent confusion isn’t transmitted to the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals.

As part of a 2005 criminal investigation of Stephen Warshak for fraud, the government invoked the Stored Communications Act of 1986 to justify issuing a secret order to Warshak’s ISP, NuVox, demanding copies of Warshak’s e-mail. When Warshak found out that the DOJ was reading his e-mails, he filed a civil suit against the government, claiming that the manner in which the e-mail snooping was carried out violated both the SCA and the Fourth Amendment.

The full article can be found here.

Getting Active in Preserving and Retrieving ESI

Preservation and Collection of ESI are related to legal and regulatory matters in common practice. Don’t take these crucial steps lightly when preparing for a Judge. See this article in the New York Law Journal by Mark A. Berman, entitled Get Active in Perserving, Retrieving ESI to read about the recent Manhattan Supreme Court ruling that has setup guidelines for ESI.

To read more, click here.

What Goes In a Litigation Hold Letter?

By Joshua Gilliland, Esq. from http://bowtielaw.wordpress.com/

One of the issues that continues to grow in importance is drafting a litigation hold (preservation) letter for your opponent. Of greater importance is enacting a litigation hold to avoid destroying any evidence.

What goes into a litigation hold letter? Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya extensively outlined what should go in a litigation hold letter in Stone v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12105 (D. Colo., Feb. 2, 2009).

Judge Tafoya’s opinion identified the following for a litigation hold letter:

  • Basic investigative work should uncover appropriate topics for the letter.
  • Common sense should guide the actual points to include in a preservation letter.
  • A litigation hold letter is not a discovery request.
  • A party can disregard the request to preserve, but once the request has formally been made and evidence disappears, a preservation letter may place the discovering party in a superior position to seek sanctions or other relief.
  • At a minimum, a letter should begin with a general statement that the discovering party expects the party to preserve digital evidence that in all probability will be relevant to the issues in a case, or may lead to the discovery of such evidence.
  • The preservation letter should include a request that the other party suspend its regular document retention policy pending discovery.
  • The preservationletter should identify all of the possible locations where such evidence might conceivably reside.
  • The letter should inform the opposing party that a mere file backup of the hard drive is not adequate preservation.
  • The party must be instructed to image hard drive in bit-stream copies, where all areas, used and unused, of the hard drive are copied.
  • If a file is deleted before a backup is made, the deleted file will not be copied unless it is a bit-stream copy.
  • The letter should also request that deleted files that are reasonably recoverable be immediately undeleted. Stone v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12105 (D. Colo. Feb. 2, 2009)

Possibly the two most important principles from this check list 1) common sense should guide the preservation letter 2) a litigation hold letter is not a discovery request. It is easy to imagine lawyers being overly cautious and drafting what sounds like discovery requests instead of identifying what should be preserved.

There is one big problem with this case: This opinion will be criticized because the judge denied a motion to preserve evidence because the Pro se plaintiff failed to assert or attach a “presentation letter.” While not wading into those issues in this posting, Stone v. Lockheed Martin Corp. provides a good overview of what should be included in a preservation letter.

–borrowed with permission from http://bowtielaw.wordpress.com

Superior Document Services March Madness!!


Its nearly time for the most exciting sporting event of the year - in my opinion anyway.

For 9 years now Superior Document Services has run a FREE March Madness pool for clients; business associates and friends. This will be the first year I have opened it up to the blogosphere - but what the heck; the more the merrier.

I’ve switched from CBSSportsline to a new easier to enter site this year and am eager to see how it pans out

Below is the text of the email I will be sending out next week along with a link to the host site ; but don’t wait - there’s no time like now!

You are receiving this email inviting you to play in the Superior Document Services / Kriss Wilson FREE March Madness Bracket Pool because you are an honored business associate; a personal friend; or a victim of circumstance.

Non the less please join in the fun and compete for big prizes

Superior Document Services 9th annual March Madness Basketball pool is back and better than ever!!

First and most importantly the pool has moved to a better EASIER to use web site. No personal information; no emails , no passwords to remember- just straight up basketball fun!

The NCAA Bracket Pool is at runyourpool.com. When you sign up ofr the pool, please follow these steps:
1. Go to http://www.runyourpool.com/join.cfm

2. Enter the following information:
a. In the Pool ID box, enter the number 6678
b. In the Pool Password box, enter ’superior’ (without the single quotes)

3. Fill out the form information, including a personal username and password. (Rest assured, this information will NOT be sold or utilized for spam email under ANY circumstances.)

4. Make your bracket picks, with the ability to change them right up until your pool’s deadline.

5. Feel free to request entries for coworkers and friends.

6. Prizes for First, Second and last places - a donation in your name to a favorite charity is an honorable option too.

First $125 gift certificate
Second $50 gift certificate
Last - intense scrutiny
It’s that easy. If you have any questions, let me know.

By Kriss Wilson

Don’t Forget the iPhone

Like many spouses, I received my first iPhone as a Christmas present from my wonderful husband. I spent nearly my entire vacation day getting to know my new mobile device and downloading exciting applications that promise to make my life easier. As I started social networking through my iPhone, I was excited to see the many others I knew who also had my same mobile device. According to MacDailyNews, by the end of 2008, over 13 million iPhones were sold. An interesting statistic I learned is that daily website traffic from phones is 3% on the low-end and on 10% on the high-end of all traffic. With easy to use new phones like the iPhone, daily web usage will only increase.

To say the very least, mobile computing is booming. Many people are starting to use their iPhone and Blackberry devices as their day to day computers. The most advanced users are not even opening up their laptops for days and are sending all email from their mobile device.

Mobile devices can offer a plethora of useful (and hurtful) information. If pictures can help (or hurt) your case, the mobile device is where you should go. In 2009, it is predicted that 968 million mobile phones will be in use with over 89% of the phones having camera’s built within.

Due to the small size of mobile phones, cloud computing through mobile phones is expected to increase. The “cloud” is where all data from the mobile device is created and stored and new tools called “Internet Assistants” help wireless devices send computing tasks via the web to servers known as “the cloud”.

When requesting eDiscovery, don’t forget to ask for information from the user’s mobile devices, and, if needed, probe as to whether the mobile device has been used for cloud computing.

By Shawnna Childress

Ariz. appeals court rules ‘metadata’ aren’t public records

PHOENIX — A divided Arizona appellate court has ruled that hidden electronic data that indicate how and when documents are produced with word-processing computer programs aren’t themselves public records.

The three-judge Court of Appeals panel’s Jan. 13 majority opinion rejected a dissenting judge’s argument that a Phoenix police officer was entitled to “metadata” for notes written by a supervisor of the officer.