COVID-19 Is Turbocharging the Migration to Remote E-Discovery Collection
Remote collection is becoming more prevalent as more employees work outside the office, but e-discovery companies say it's part of a larger trend that will continue after COVID-19 subsides.
April 27, 2020 at 11:30 AM
3 minute read
Remote data collection could become the norm as e-discovery companies and their clients look for data collection alternatives amidst an increasingly dispersed and remote workforce.
"The legal community tends to adopt technology only reluctantly or is forced to by clients or circumstances," said X1 Discovery Inc. CEO Craig Carpenter. "A migration to remote collection had been happening for several years but relatively slowly. [With] coronavirus it will be expedited."
X1 looked to capitalize on that migration with the recent launch of X1E Remote Collection On-Demand, a remote, cloud-based data collection solution.
"It can be remote collection on-demand as they need it. That's new and in response to the new remote-from-work mandate we all have," Carpenter noted.
To be sure, as COVID-19 has forced many to work remotely, the novel virus also makes the traditional e-discovery workflow of physically going to a data custodian's location and manually using forensic image software to capture their computer or device less practical, noted Infinnium co-founder and chief innovation officer Nirav Avaiya.
Earlier this month, Infinnium also released a remote collection feature for its information governance suite 4iG. Avaiya said that COVID-19 was the "motivation to speed up the process" of developing and launching the feature. However, the new feature was also in response to a broader trend of companies leveraging cloud-based solutions, such as G Suite, Office 365 and Slack, that made collecting data from hard drives less needed, he added.
Additionally, e-discovery providers collecting data on-site will likely overcollect data to avoid missing pertinent information, but that can put a provider's client at risk of violating the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and other regulations, Avaiya noted. E-discovery providers are also exposed to more risk if hard drives, and not select data, is mishandled, he added.
Remote collection introduces a new "modern" workflow that involves filtering out what is collected before the software copies the file, Carpenter said. He noted, "It's more surgical from the onset and that's why clients love it."
Still, remote collection comes with challenges when attempting to collect from certain devices, he explained.
"Cellphones are their own little universe with completely different [operating systems] and storage methodologies, so they are handled by very specialized tech like Cellebrite," he said. Similarly, tablets have unique operating systems that are difficult to remotely collect from.
While remote collection has its limitations, e-discovery vendors copying necessary files shouldn't bog down the client's internet, Avaiya noted. "[It] doesn't use the bandwidth of the organization, it can just use the open bandwidth of the data center or vendor and the company can work as usual without the slowness."
Ayaiya argued there aren't many challenges unique to remote collection that providers wouldn't face when traditionally collecting data for clients. Those common issues vary by client but can include encountering encrypted data and working with the client's IT and legal team to understand the company's data retention and backup programs.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Groundbreaking Contingency Cap Ballot Measure
- 2OpenAI Tells Court It Will Seek to Consolidate Copyright Suits Under MDL
- 34th Circuit Allows State Felon Voting Ban Challenge to Go Forward
- 4Class Actions Claim Progressive Undervalues Totaled Cars
- 5How the Trump II Administration Can Combat Antisemitism
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250