There are plenty of people echoing the risks associated with legacy data and a "keep everything” mentality. Join us for a webinar that takes those discussions a step further, offering insight from both a legal and technical perspective into how remediation projects can be managed cost effectively and in a manner that does not up-end everyday business operations. During this one-hour discussion, Redgrave LLP Partner Andy Cosgrove and Analysts Diana Fasching and Christian Rummelhoff also outline a defensible framework for the disposition of legacy data, and share real-world examples of paper and electronic remediation projects. Victoria Edelman, Vice President of Education for the ALSP and Director of Training for iCONECT Development, facilitates.

1. Legacy Data Remediation: A Practical Approach
Presented to the Association of Litigation Support Professionals
Wednesday, March 30, 2011

2. Today’s Panel
Andy Cosgrove
Partner, Redgrave LLP
acosgrove@redgravellp.com
Christian Rummelhoff
Senior Analyst, Redgrave LLP
crummelhoff@redgravellp.com
Diana Fasching
Senior Analyst, Redgrave LLP
dfasching@redgravellp.com
2

3. Presentation Goals
• Gain legal and technical perspectives into a legacy
data remediation project
• Identify unique issues associated with the remediation
of paper and electronic legacy data
• Introduce ways to manage costs and limit burdens on
everyday business operations
3

4. Top 5 Reasons to Take Notice
TOP #5) Litigation Costs
#4) Litigation Risks; Why Keep Tomorrow’s
Smoking Gun?
#3) Reputation Risks; The WikiLeaks Effect
#2) State & Federal Privacy Regulations
#1) Retention Costs; The Box Burden
4

5. Re-Defining Legacy Data
Paper: Electronic:
• Paper files, Photographs, • Old Backup Tapes, Backups
Marketing Materials, and Other Made Prior to Data Migration
Hardcopy Documents • Orphaned ESI (e.g.
• Materials Stored On and/or departmental file shares)
Offsite (e.g. Iron Mountain) • Inactive/Decommissioned
• Documents in the Possession Servers
of Third Parties • Retained Collections of Hard
Drives, CDs or other Media
• Data in the Possession of Third
parties
5

6. A Process for Addressing Legacy Data
Iterative High-Level Risk-Focused
Identify Disposition Understand Data Prepare Information
Constraints Store(s) for Comparison
- Retention Obligations - Origins - Preservation Matrix and
- Statutory, Regulatory, - Date Ranges Materials Index
Common Law Requirements - Formats - Similar Measures Allow
- Contractual Requirements - Content Direct Comparison
- Legal Hold Obligations - Custodian
Disposition of Data Apply Risk Assessment
(Reasonable Investigation)
- Is Info Likely Relevant?
- Is Info Likely Unique?
- Duty to Preserve/Maintain?
6

7. Remediation Framework/Considerations
• 3 Key Considerations: Iterative, High Level, Risk Focused
• General Tips
– Work From Available Information; Infer Where Reasonable
– Identify Best Value Approaches to Additional Investigation
– Document Each Step
• Identify Deletion/Destruction Constraints
– Identify/Clarify Constraints at Issue Using Measurable Descriptors
• Understand Data Stores
– Origins, Date Ranges, Formats, Content, Custodian
– Key Differences in Population – Breakdown Material into Groups
– Additional Investigation: Sampling, Interviews, Database Mining
• Prepare Information for Comparison
– Constrains and Materials - Use Same/Similar Descriptors
• Apply Risk Assessment to Identify Disposable Information
7

8. Paper – A Real World Example
Situation Process Resolution
• Fortune 250 company with over 50K boxes of hard
copy paper records eligible for disposition under the
record schedule
• Desire to dispose of material not subject to legal hold
• Significant information available about the material in
the boxes; less information available on open legal
holds
• Cost of assessment needed to be proportional to the
cost of storing the material
8

9. Paper – A Real World Example
Situation Process Resolution
• Validated information about the materials
– Sampled boxes to confirm accuracy of indices
– QC missing and suspect information (e.g., dates)
• Gathered information regarding legal holds
– Reviewed all open holds and used available matter reporting capabilities
– Follow-up
• Created “Preservation Matrix”
– Consolidated holds into manageable number of categories
– Each category had as broad a scope as the sum of the component holds
– Primary considerations: Record Code, Date Range; Also Geography,
Department,
– Obtained case-team sign-off on hold scope assumptions
– High quality of indices meant no need for equivalent categorization of
material
• Iterative, Risk-Based Assessment
9

10. Paper – A Real World Example
Situation Process Resolution
• Recommended reasonable and legally defensible
disposition of specific material
– One third cleared at the first iteration (Record Code)
– Another third cleared at the Record Code by date iteration
– Final third held by a handful of cases requiring case-specific additional
follow-up (collection, case team identification of relevant materials)
• Other significant highlights:
– Process from took longer than originally planned –the evolving hold
environment (as cases open/close) complicated analysis
– Outside counsel required some case-specific additional steps
• Next time…
– Identify critical cases (and most conservative attorneys) and involve
those case teams much earlier in the process to prevent delays
10

11. ESI – A Real World Example
Situation Process Resolution
• Global 500 company with over 60K legacy media
items in one division
• Mostly backup tapes
– Varying tape types and backup mechanisms (including NDMP)
• Media assumed to contain emails, user files,
application data and other unknown content
• Little to no inventory information available for a large
subset of the media items
• Desire to dispose of this information to reduce legal
risk and storage costs
11

12. ESI – A Real World Example
Situation Process Resolution
• Identified team members
• Researched as much information as possible regarding
media items and legal holds
• Established sampling hypothesis
– Materials on backup media were largely duplicative because legal hold
custodians were preserving materials in active storage
• Developed sampling strategy
– Selected less than 50 (out of over 60K) media items to sample, targeting
different date ranges and content (both email and file share backups)
• Restored, indexed and then filtered data based on legal
hold keywords
• Reviewed for “responsiveness” and selected statistically
valid set of emails and user files
• Worked with custodians (and IT for former employees) to
validate hypothesis
12

13. ESI – A Real World Example
Situation Process Resolution
• Recommended reasonable and legally defensible
disposition of media items
• Proceeded with destruction/recycling of approximately
80% of legacy media items
• Continued hold on the remaining media items
• Other significant highlights:
– Process from kick-off to recommendations took about 8 months —
several months longer than originally planned
– Had to be flexible and adjust plan as issues were encountered
– End result was well-received within Legal and by IT
– Considering different approach on subsequent projects to minimize
vendor costs
13

14. Other Real World Examples
Examples?
14

15. Additional Resources
• www.redgravellp.com:
– Webcasts: “What do you want your legacy to be?”
– Link: Sedona Commentary on Inactive Information
– Podcast Links:
• Dealing with Legacy Data – What to do About ESI Messes Today
• Will Judges Think it is Okay to Use Clustering & Suggestive Coding Tools
• Organizations:
15