1. RenewDataElectronic Evidence and Preservation Archiving
ActiveVault™ Managed
Preservation Archiving System
WHITEPAPER

2. ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving Service2
Table of Contents
Overview.................................................................................................................... 3
ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving Service........................................... 9
Conclusion................................................................................................................ 11

3. ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving Service3
The Objective
Enable corporations to gain control over reactive electronic evidence production
and review costs.
The Goals
• Plan legal strategies based on real knowledge of situation.
• Reduce the cost of initial and subsequent legal discovery productions.
• Enable elimination of historical backup tapes used for data archiving.
• Enable retention policy implementation (destruction).
The Problem
Most large corporations have thousands of backup tapes containing billions
of pages of e-mail messages including attachments and user file information
(“Unstructured Data”). To date there has been no way to economically extract, de-
duplicate, store and give the corporation access to this information.
Because of the contention between retention policies and the real-world practicality
that email and user files are typically archived on backup tape for disaster recovery
purposes, most large organizations have more than 3 trillion pages of data archived
on backup tape. Much of this data contains duplicates of the same user file or
email. This situation leaves an organization vulnerable when faced with initial and
subsequent discovery requests.
Corporations are being confronted by government agencies with low tolerance for
production delays and liberal civil discovery laws, leaving their legal departments
to question:
• Has relevant data been properly preserved?
• What is the time, difficulty and cost to recover and retrieve relevant data?
• What level of business disruption will there be preserving and recovering data?
• How can irrelevant and privileged data be sorted out prior to legal review?
• How can truly relevant data be identified?
• How can the same preserved data be leveraged across multiple matters?
• How can costs be managed to avoid escalating costs for future requests?
Case law is rapidly developing that shows the potential danger for companies who
fail to properly preserve and produce responsive electronic documents. Judge Shira
Scheindlin of the Southern District of New York has handed down five opinions in
the matter of Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, an employment discrimination case.
Zubulake I – Judge Scheindlin addressed Zubulake’s claim that relevant emails
had been deleted from UBS’s active servers and existed only on optical disks and
“inaccessible” backup tapes. Judge Scheindlin ordered UBS to produce all respon-
sive e-mails from optical disk and on active servers and to bear the cost of restoring
a sample of five backup tapes selected by Zubulake.1
Overview
1Zubulake v. UBS Warburg (“Zubulake I”), F.R.D. 309 (S.D.N.Y. May 13, 2003)
RenewData

4. ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving Service4
Zubulake III – Judge Scheindlin ordered UBS to bear 75% of the restoration
cost of sixteen backup tapes after Zubulake demonstrated that UBS had failed to
maintain all relevant emails in its active files (optical disks).2
Zubulake IV – Zubulake moved for sanctions after learning during the restoration
of sixteen backup tapes from Zubulake III that UBS failed to preserve all relevant
backup tapes. Judge Scheindlin found fault in UBS’s document preservation strate-
gy but lacked evidence that the lost tapes were particularly favorable to Zubulake.
Judge Scheindlin ordered UBS to pay for the re-deposition of several key UBS
employees.3 Zubulake IV affirms that a party must take reasonable steps to
suspend its routine document retention by putting a “litigation hold” in place when
the party reasonably anticipates litigation. In addition, Zubulake IV established
responsibilities for legal counsel to monitor the preservation process.4
These responsibilities include:
• That all relevant information and its sources must be identified;
• That relevant information is retained on a continuing basis;
• That relevant non-privileged material is produced to the opposing party in
response to proper discovery demands.5
Zubulake V – Zubulake moved to sanction UBS for failure to produce relevant
information. In her findings, Judge Scheindlin concluded that UBS acted willful-
ly in destroying relevant information and failing to follow the instructions of
counsel.6 Zubulake V provides instructions for in-house counsel to follow as a
means of demonstrating their “continuous efforts” to preserve and avoid spolia-
tion.
These responsibilities include:
• Issuing a litigation hold;
• Communicating directly with key players in the litigation and clearly communi-
cate their preservation responsibilities;
• Instructing all employees to produce electronic copies of relevant active files;
• Ensuring all required backup media is identified and stored in a safe place.
Only one day after Zubulake V was released, the U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia issued similar sanctions in United States of America v. Philip
Morris USA Inc. U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler noted that tobacco giant
Philip Morris had failed to retain e-mail messages despite an October 1999 court
order and the company’s own electronic discovery retention policy. Executives
in research, marketing, corporate affairs and public affairs were found to have
destroyed electronic records and intentionally failed to comply with preservation
and retention policies. Philip Morris was fined $3,000,000 for their preservation
failures.
2Zubulake v. UBS Warburg (“Zubulake III”), F.R.D. 289 (S.D.N.Y. July 20, 2003)
3Zubulake v. UBS Warburg (“Zubulake IV”), F.R.D. 222 (S.D.N.Y. July 24, 2003)
4Legal Update: Record Management Solutions, Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., August 31, 2004
5Zubulake v. UBS Warburg (“Zubulake 1V”), .R.D. 220 (S.D.N.Y. July 24, 2003)
6Zubulake v. UBS Warburg (“Zubulake V”), (S.D.N.Y. July 20, 2004)
RenewData

5. ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving Service5
Electronic discovery and preservation best practice recommendations, from both
the ABA and the Sedona Principles (http://www.thesedonaconference.org) are
attempting to provide opinions that may sway courts to more reasonable rulings in
regards to these issues. However, the effects of these efforts are not measurable at
this point in time. Potentially the proposed new Federal Discovery rules may help
ease some of the challenges of electronic discovery, but most likely will create as
many “gray” areas as solutions. The proposed new discovery rules will not take
effect until Dec. 1, 2006 or later.
The Solution
RenewData proposes these corporations migrate from a reactive to proactive
approach to preservation archiving. As opposed to IT data archiving solutions, a
preservation archive is uniquely designed to track the forensic information about
Unstructured Data. Traditional IT storage and email archiving solutions are typical-
ly searchable in order to locate a specific email. However, these solutions lack
the forensic information to demonstrate what folder the email had been stored in,
which email server originated the email and the specific source media. Lacking this
information may create an opening for the opposition to question if the “original”
email is being produced.
In order to implement preservation archiving, RenewData has combined its proven
electronic evidence production expertise with its high volume tape extraction
capability and created the ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving
Service. The ActiveVault Managed Preservation Archiving Service provides
economical, large volume off-site electronic evidence preservation and record
archiving for legal matters.
RenewData’s non-invasive approach works off of the corporation’s existing
backup tapes, requiring no software installation in the corporate environment.
The ActiveVault technology is a scalable enterprise solution for storing, accessing
and producing Unstructured Data. The key to scalability is ActiveVault’s single-
instance storage model. Single-instance storage is a system’s ability to keep one
copy of content associated with multiple custodians.
Preservation Archive
Current and historical e-mail messages including
attachments and user files are easily accessible
including:
• Searching
• Culling
• Filtering by keyword, date, person or other fields
• Outputting (productions) in native format and
legal database load files
• Management of outputs by matter
Legal Support
Expert consulting services are available to
support the Preservation Archive including:
• Keyword search strategies
• Boolean search design
• Production strategies
• Outside counsel production design management
• Review tool analysis and implementation
• Testifying
RenewData

6. ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving Service6
The ActiveVault Managed Preservation Archiving Service provides:
Using a proactive evidence preservation approach, the company will have the tools
to assess the company’s legal exposure early in the litigation process or even before
litigation begins, creating three possible outcomes:
1. A “smoking gun” e-mail or user file is found. The company is guilty – bad
news. The good news is that the position is known early. The strategy is typically to
settle as soon as possible. The company saves on outside legal costs, executive time
and very likely, on settlement costs.
2. A “white knight” e-mail or user file is found that completely exonerates the
corporation. The evidence can be presented to the other side (perhaps a plaintiff
attorney on 100% contingency), resulting in termination of the case. The savings are
obvious.
3. No information is found that proves/disproves innocence. The company can at
least know that it can execute a legal strategy without fear of any negative repercus-
sions resulting from future electronic evidence productions.
The Benefits
ActiveVault stores electronic information for easy access, quick assessment of legal
exposure and better preparation for initial and subsequent discovery requests. The
result of a company’s Unstructured Data being readily available enables:
• Control of litigation costs with the ability to plan strategies based on real knowledge
of their situation.
• Significantly reduced timeframes to produce initial and subsequent production
requests as pre-processed and indexed native file data is available for immediate
search and output.
• Cull electronic evidence to the minimum sub-set, reducing costs from review tool
loading thru legal review.
• Protect the company from any risk of fines for evidence spoliation.
• Enable the implementation of retention policy by elimination of archive backup
tapes.
ActiveVault Managed Preservation Archiving Service allows a company to:
• Avoid business disruption as a result of discovery requests.
• Avoid IT disruption by using a service instead of installing and maintaining a in-
house system.
• Eliminate premiums based on time, volume and complexity charged for electronic
evidence productions.
• Access to the responsive Unstructured Data when the company’s legal team needs it.
RenewData

7. ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving Service7
The Savings
Below is a sample of the potential savings from using ActiveVault Managed Preser-
vation Archiving Service:
$46M
$4.2M $3.8M
$50
$45
$40
$35
$30
$25
$20
$15
$10
$5
$0
3-year Service Cost
(Process Weekly Tapes)
3-year Service Cost
(Process Daily Tapes)
MILLION
3-year Savings
Assumptions Annual Savings 3-year Savings
Case that should have been settled early (likely to lose)
but were continued in the litigation process longer that
necessary if true position were known
- 10 cases @ $500,000 ea
Efficiently produce electronic evidence from ActiveVault
vs. old processes
- 10 cases @ $500,000 ea.
Cull electronic evidence to the minimum sub-set,
reducing costs from review tool loading thru legal review
from ActiveVault vs. existing process
- 10 cases @ $500,000
Enable the implementation of retention policy by
elimination of archive backup tapes
- 2,600 tapes per year: purchase for $100 ea. & store
14,000 off-site at .50 ea. per month for 12 months
$5,000,000
$5,000,000
$5,000,000
$267,000
$15,000,000
$15,000,000
$15,000,000
$801,000
3-year total: $45,801,000
RenewData

8. ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving Service8
Rationale of Archiving Weekly vs. Daily Backup Data
When restoring email from daily backup tapes, all email not created and deleted
within a 24-hour period will be recovered. When restoring email from weekly
backup tapes, all email not created and deleted within a 7-day period will be
recovered. From a logical viewpoint, while it is likely that someone who wants
to hide a particular email message created on Monday may delete such a message
on Friday, what most commonly occurs is that person will delete the sent message
immediately from their sent mail items on the same day it is sent. People typically
don’t worry about deleting email messages until after they have been notified to
stop doing so due to a preservation order. RenewData’s estimates the amount of
data lost between daily and weekly backup restores is less than 1%. If desired,
RenewData can provide an accurate assessment of the amount of data lost between
daily and weekly backup restores specific to a company’s data with a test project.
A Hybrid Approach
The best approach to creating the preservation archive might be a hybrid approach.
Backup tapes that are currently preserved for existing or pending litigation can be
added to the preservation archive and “tagged” as belonging to a specific matter.
These tapes may include daily backups. Email communication stored for SEC 17a-
4 requirements on WORM storage can also be added to the archive. For all other
time periods, the weekly backup tapes are sufficient to create a viable, accurate
archive.
Service Description (Process Daily Tapes) 3-year Costs
Initial 14,000 tape load into Preservation Archive
3-year proactive tape load into Preservation Archive
(estimated @ 50 tapes per week)
3-year Preservation Archive Storage
$1,260,000
$702,000
$2,304,000
3-year total: $4,266,000
220% annual ROI over 3 years
Service Description (Process Weekly Tapes) 3-year Costs
Initial 7,000 tape load into Preservation Archive
3-year proactive tape load into Preservation Archive
(estimated @ 50 tapes per week)
3-year Preservation Archive Storage
$840,000
$936,000
$2,016,000
3-year total: $3,792,000
229% annual ROI over 3 years
RenewData

9. ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving Service9
ActiveVault™ Managed
Preservation Archiving Service
Service Description
The ActiveVault Managed Preservation Archiving Service provides economical,
off-site electronic evidence preservation and record archiving for legal matters.
RenewData’s non-invasive approach works off of a company’s existing backup
tapes, requiring no software installation in their environment.
The implementation process for the ActiveVault Managed Preservation Archiving
Service is:
• RenewData processes the company’s historical backup tapes into ActiveVault
Preservation Manager according to an agreed upon plan and schedule;
• The company sends new weekly or monthly (as appropriate) backup tapes of
email servers and user file directories to RenewData;
• RenewData processes backup tapes into ActiveVault;
• RenewData returns backup tapes;
• RenewData produces what company’s legal team needs when it is needed.
Input Definition
Input Media
• Standard Tape Types: DLT III, DLT IV, DAT, AIT, SDLT, LTO1, LTO2
Email – Historical Archive Processing
• Microsoft Exchange 5.5 and higher
• Lotus Notes 3.0 and higher
Email – Weekly Processing (Journaling Activated)
• Microsoft Exchange 2000 and higher
• Lotus Notes 6.0 and higher
User File and Email Attachment Definition
• Client defined directories
• By file extension (verified by introspection upon loading)
• Text indexable: *.csv *.doc *.dot *.dqi *.htm *.html *.ltr *.msg *.pdf *.pps *.ppt
*.rtf *.txt *.wk1 *.wk3 *.wkb *.xls *.xlw *.wpc *.wpd *.wri *.wps;
• Graphic files (non-text indexable): *.jpg *.gif *.tif *.pcx *.bmp;
• Compressed files (indexes text indexable documents within compressed files):
*.zip
Exception Handling
• Damaged tapes will not be processed
• Damaged Microsoft Exchange email files (Exchange “priv .edb” or Exchange
200x equivalent) will not be processed
• Brick level Microsoft Exchange email files (Exchange “priv .edb” or Exchange
200x equivalent) will not be processed
• Damaged Lotus Notes email files (.NSF) will not be processed
• Damaged or password encrypted User Files will be quarantined and stored but not
processed
• All damaged items that are not processed will be documented in the chain-of-
custody log
RenewData

10. ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving Service10
Disaster Recovery
• Monthly backups with off-site storage - Included
• Optional redundant off-site database - Custom Price
Service
• Service hours from 8 am – 5 pm CST
• Named Engagement Manager
Preservation Archiving Storage
Additional Services
Productions from ActiveVault - Client may request that selective searches and
productions be performed by RenewData from the data stored in ActiveVault
whereby the directory structure and/or file server name(s) for the Target User(s)
are known for an additional charge.
Expert search – Client can request that RenewData attempt to identify additional
user data located in ActiveVault for an additional charge, whereby the directory
structure and/or file server name(s) for the Target User(s) are not known and/or
other filtering criteria is used.
Consulting - Client can request that RenewData perform search methodology
consulting, custom report creation and other such services for an additional fee.
Consulting – Expert Witness Services - Client can request that RenewData expert
witness services for an additional fee.
ActiveVault Termination - Client may request to have their data returned or
forensically destroyed at the termination of the ActiveVault storage agreement.
Data Storage on Accessebility Disaster Recovery Production Start
RAID 10 System Immediate Monthly tape backup Start within 24
& off-site storage business hours
ACTIVEVAULT
Preservation Archive
RenewData

11. ActiveVault™ Managed Preservation Archiving Service11
Conclusion
RenewData believes the best solution for companies to reduce production costs are
proactive strategies, including litigation preparedness initiatives and specifically
the re-use of email and native files for multiple matters using a forensic, native file
preservation system. RenewData’s experience with customers has demonstrated
that on a per matter basis, the cost of collecting, culling, review and production is
significantly less expensive using a proactive preservation solution.
Using the ActiveVault Managed Preservation Service, corporations will be able to
achieve its goals of:
• Plan legal strategies based on real knowledge of company’s legal situation.
• Reduce the cost of initial and subsequent legal discovery productions.
• Enable elimination of historical backup tapes used for data archiving.
• Enable retention policy implementation (destruction).
The investment costs of such an effort are far outweighed by the savings, benefits
and reduction of risk for companies since “the ultimate duty to preserve remains
with the party to the litigation…and the federal courts appear more willing than
ever to grant sanctions for noncompliance.”7
RenewDataElectronic Evidence and Preservation Archiving
Copyright © 2005 Renew Data Corp. All rights reserved. RenewData and the sphere logo are registered trademarks and
ActiveVault is a trademark of Renew Data Corp. All other company and product names may be trademarks of their respective owners.
9500 Arboretum Blvd Suite L2-120 / Austin, TX 78759 / www.renewdata.com
512.276.5500 Office / 1.888.811.3789 Toll Free / 512.276.5555 Fax
7Legal Update: Record Management Solutions, Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., August 31, 2004
RenewData