You are here: Home / Archives for search

Introducing iReview Analytics™ Early Case Assessment Tool for Electronic Discovery

January 17, 2012 By Leave a Comment

The sheer volume of potentially relevant electronically stored information (ESI) in companies and government organizations challenges any organization to understand the costs of e-discovery and prepare for each step of litigation. Even with data already in litigation hold and through a first pass filter there can be a tremendous volume to sift through, leaving many uncertainties.

The question then becomes this: How do you extract the information you need in order to understand the potential costs of a full review without undertaking a full review — and still be prepared for a Rule 26 meet and confer?

iReview Analytics™ from Global EDD Group is an early case assessment (ECA) tool that gives you the insight you need to be prepared. iReview Analytics utilizes CAAT, a powerful example of a new class of technologies known as “Text Analytics”, to transform large volumes of unstructured data, such as documents, emails, and publications, into relevant, actionable information. Text Analytics automate most of the human activity traditionally associated with ECA to understand, organize, prioritize and retrieve information from large sources of unstructured data.

iReview Analytics was developed in partnership with Content Analyst Analytical Technology (CAAT), a leading developer of advanced analytics for searching and analyzing unstructured text. iReview Analytics includes the CAAT engine – a unique, patented software system that provides advanced Conceptual Search functions based on Latent Semantic Indexing. This search technology enables iReview Analytics to acquire all its search intelligence from the actual documents being indexed. Unlike other solutions, iReview Analytics does not require external dictionaries or thesauri. It works across foreign languages, even searching – and finding – relevant documents in different languages –without prior translation.

iReview Analytics returns to you an analysis of your data that identifies key concepts, categorizes those concepts and then provides you the ability to sample the documents based on the most relevant categories. This early case assessment gives you the information you need to understand costs and prepare for Rule 26 meet and confer at a fraction of the cost of a full review.

iReview Analytics™ Capabilities:

Concept Search – Using advanced mathematic formulas to allow users to find similar, related, and relevant documents based purely on the concepts those documents are discussing – without using keywords, and without retrieving “matching, yet irrelevant” content.

Categorization – Allows users to define categories by means of examples. Based on the exemplars, iReview Analytics and CAAT technology automatically categorizes incoming documents.

Instant Context (Contextual Explanation) – Helps users understand unfamiliar terminology. The user clicks on an unfamiliar term and iReview Analytics with CAAT highlights similar terms found in related text.

Language Analytics – Within any single language, iReview Analytics with CAAT can be applied to any topic, vocabulary or language that can be represented in the Unicode encoding system. In a cross-lingual mode, users can submit queries in English while searching documents in other languages.

Summarization – Automatically identifies sentences in a document that best represent key concepts, and uses those sentences to give users a quick summary of the entire document.

Dynamic Clustering – Allows a user to point iReview Analytics with CAAT to a set of documents and then allow iReview Analytics with CAAT to dynamically group conceptually-similar documents together in a tree-type hierarchy and finally, to apply a descriptive title to each cluster of documents.

Near Duplicate Document Detection – Uses iReview Analytics with CAAT Dynamic Clustering to identify and group documents that are duplicates and/or near-duplicate documents, as well as identifying the extent of duplication.

Learn more about iReview Analytics and Global EDD Group by clicking to http://www.globaleddgroup.com/

iReview Analytics™ from Global EDD Group

Filed Under: From The News Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Plaintiff “Entitled” to Search Non-Party’s Personal Hard Drive Pursuant to Modified Subpoena : Electronic Discovery Law

January 8, 2012 By Leave a Comment

Wood v. Town of Warsaw, N.C., No. 7:10-CV-00219-D, 2011 WL 6748797 (E.D.N.C. Dec. 22, 2011)

Defendant moved to modify a subpoena which sought access to a non-party’s personal hard drive.  Upon plaintiff’s clarification that he would bear the costs of the search and cooperate to negotiate search terms and that he sought only the non-privileged ESI identified by search terms and not all contents of the drive, the court ordered that the non-party’s counsel could review the results before production and allowed the search to go forward.

In this employment discrimination case, defendant sought to modify a subpoena seeking inspection of a non-party’s personal hard drive and specifically objected that the subpoena was overly broad, unduly burdensome, not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and sought private, irrelevant information.  The non-party was the former town manager and allegedly involved in plaintiff’s termination—the underlying issue in this case.

via Plaintiff “Entitled” to Search Non-Party’s Personal Hard Drive Pursuant to Modified Subpoena : Electronic Discovery Law.

Filed Under: From The News Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Sanctions Ordered for Failure to Adequately “Preserve, Search for, and Collect Potentially Relevant Information” : Electronic Discovery Law

December 9, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Naaco Materials Handling Group, Inc. v. Lilly Co., No. 11-2415 AV, 2011 WL 5986649 (W.D. Tenn. Nov. 16, 2011)

In this case, the court found that defendant “failed to take reasonable steps to preserve, search for, and collect potentially relevant information . . . after its duty to preserve evidence was triggered by being served with the complaint” which may have resulted in the destruction of relevant evidence.  Further, defendant failed to present an adequately prepared and knowledgeable 30(b)(6) deponent.  Accordingly, sanctions were imposed, including, among other things, additional discovery, additional forensic imaging at defendant’s expense, and monetary sanctions.

Plaintiff accused defendant of illegally accessing its proprietary website on over 40,000 occasions.  Early in the litigation process, the court granted plaintiff’s motion for expedited discovery which  resulted in an order allowing plaintiff’s expert to conduct a forensic examination of defendant’s computers to determine which, if any, were used to access plaintiff’s proprietary information and to make a copy of any hard drive on which such access was detected.  Evidence of access was found on 17 of the 35 computers subject to examination.  As litigation progressed, and in particular following the deposition of defendant’s 30(b)(6) deponent, plaintiff became concerned that relevant information had been lost and moved to prevent further spoliation and for defendant to bear many discovery-related costs.

The court’s opinion identified several discovery violations, including defendant’s failure to adequately and timely disseminate a legal hold notice; defendant’s failure to “to prevent emails from being deleted, to prevent data from being overwritten, or to identify and preserve backup tapes which might contain the only electronic evidence of access to [plaintiff’s] secure dealer website;” and defendant’s failure to “collect evidence from the key players or to search key players’ computers to see if ESI existed or had been deleted.”  Further, defendant “left collection efforts to its employees to search their own computers without supervision or oversight from management” and took no effort to follow up with its employees or to document any of its search and collection efforts.  Defendant also failed to provide an adequately prepared 30(b)(6) deponent.  Accordingly, the court determined that defendant was “at a minimum, negligent in discharging its discovery obligations.”  The court noted, however, that plaintiff did not produce proof that relevant evidence was in fact destroyed and that the extent of prejudice was therefore in question; more substantial sanctions were therefore not warranted.  Nonetheless, the court found that lesser sanctions were appropriate.

via Sanctions Ordered for Failure to Adequately “Preserve, Search for, and Collect Potentially Relevant Information” : Electronic Discovery Law.

Filed Under: From The News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,

Google Adds Apture For In-Page Search in Chrome – Application Development – News & Reviews – eWeek.com

November 11, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Google acquired Apture to provide contextually relevant search technology within Web pages served by the Chrome Web browser.

Google (NASDAQ:GOOG) Nov. 10 confirmed it acquired in-page search specialist Apture for an undisclosed sum, a move to bolster the company’s search experience in its Chrome Web browser.

Apture makes software called Highlights that publishers such as Hearst, the Reader’s Digest and Financial Times embed in their Websites to let readers search within Web pages.

Readers highlight words in an article on a Web page supported by Apture to see a small, overlay browser window that provides links to contextually relevant text, videos, photos and more information about the highlighted topic.

Apture content is a vector for Google. While Apture sources for text include links to TechCrunch, Flickr, Twitter, and Wikipedia, they are delivered by Google’s search engine. Moreover, the video options point users to Google’s YouTube property and the pictures are gleaned from Google’s Image Search product.

Apture also makes a Highlights browser extension so that users visiting Websites in Chrome Mozilla Firefox, or Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) Safari browsers.

via Google Adds Apture For In-Page Search in Chrome – Application Development – News & Reviews – eWeek.com.

Filed Under: Tech Bytes Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Google Changes Search Algorithm, Trying to Make Results More Timely – NYTimes.com

November 3, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Acknowledging that some searches were giving people stale results, Google revised its methods on Thursday to make the answers timelier. It is one of the biggest tweaks to Google’s search algorithm, affecting about 35 percent of all searches.

The new algorithm is a recognition that Google, whose dominance depends on providing the most useful results, is being increasingly challenged by services like Twitter and Facebook, which have trained people to expect constant updates with seconds-old news.

It is also a reflection of how people use the Web as a real-time news feed — that if, for example, you search for a baseball score, you probably want to find the score of a game being played at the moment, not last week, which is what Google often gave you.

“This is the result of them saying we need to find a way to more effectively get fresh content up,” said Danny Sullivan, editor of Search Engine Land and an industry expert. “It does help with the issue of people thinking, ‘Wow, if I need to find out about something breaking, I’ll go to Facebook or Twitter for that.’ ”

Timeliness has long mattered to Google and its search results. Nevertheless, the company said that it always looks for improvements, and the latest change goes much further in freshening search results. Google tried once before to create real-time search, in 2009, when it introduced google.com/realtime, a service that incorporated Twitter posts that Google paid Twitter to use. But that contract expired in July and the two companies could not agree on terms to renew it, so Google disabled the site.

Americans still turn to Google for two-thirds of their Web searches, but for people who want the latest chatter about events happening now, it competes with Facebook, Twitter and Bing, Microsoft’s search engine, which includes more Twitter and Facebook posts than Google does in search results.

via Google Changes Search Algorithm, Trying to Make Results More Timely – NYTimes.com.

Filed Under: Tech Bytes Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

How Google Was Tripped up by a Bad Search | PCWorld Business Center

October 28, 2011 By Leave a Comment

In the end it was a search that let Google down.

The company suffered a setback in its patent dispute with Oracle last week when a U.S. judge denied Google’s request to keep an internal Google email out of the case record. The email, written by a Google engineer, could suggest to a jury that Google knew it needed a license to use Sun’s — now Oracle’s — Java technology in Android.

Ironically, considering this is Google, organizer of the world’s information, the email might never have seen the light of day if the search tools used to identify documents covered by attorney-client privilege had done their job, legal experts said.

The incident also shines a light on an area of technology — electronic discovery — that’s creating big challenges for lawyers as more communication moves online. And it helps explain why Hewlett-Packard is willing to spend US$10 billion to buy Autonomy, one of the biggest providers of e-discovery software and services.

The Google incident apparently stems from a mistake by one of the top law firms it hired to fight Oracle’s lawsuit, which accuses Google of patent and copyright infringement in Android. It’s a high-stakes case that could potentially cost Google billions of dollars in damages, and force it to start charging handset makers a license fee for Android.

Like many corporate lawsuits, this one began with a discovery phase. Each party is required to identify all the emails, chat logs and other documents relevant to the case, and produce them for the opposing legal team. Because there are often millions of documents involved, they use software tools to define date ranges, search for keywords and find the material they have to produce.

Communications discussing legal advice with attorneys are protected by attorney-client privilege, meaning they don’t have to be made public. Google argued that its potentially incriminating email fell into this category.

It was written by Google engineer Tim Lindholm last August, a few weeks before Oracle filed suit against Google. At the time, Oracle had threatened to sue Google for billions of dollars, and Lindholm was instructed by Google executives to see what alternatives to Java existed for use in Android, apparently to strengthen their negotiating position.

via How Google Was Tripped up by a Bad Search | PCWorld Business Center.

Filed Under: From The News, Tech Bytes Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Latent Semantic Indexing within the iReview Global Discovery Platform powers Conceptual Search

October 17, 2011 By Leave a Comment
The iReview Global Discovery Platform™ can include CAAT from Content Analyst, a unique patented software that provides advanced Conceptual Search based on Latent Semantic Indexing. This mathematical technique enables CAAT to acquire all its search intelligence from the actual documents being indexed. Unlike  other solutions,  CAAT doesn’t require  external dictionaries or thesauri and can work across languages, even searching – and finding – relevant documents in other languages without prior translation.

 

Key Functionality:

Concept Search

Using advanced mathematics to allow users to find similar, related, and relevant documents based purely on the concepts those documents are discussing – without using keywords, and without getting back “matching” yet irrelevant content.

Categorization

Allows users to define categories by means of examples. Based on the exemplars, Content Analyst technology automatically assigns incoming documents to categories.

Instant Context (Contextual Explanation)

Helps users understand unfamiliar terminology. The user clicks on an unfamiliar term, and Content Analyst technology highlights similar terms found in related text.

Language Analytics

Within any single language, Content Analyst technology can be applied to any topic, vocabulary or language that can be represented in the Unicode encoding system. In a cross-lingual mode, users can submit queries in English while searching documents in other languages.

Summarization

Automatically identifies sentences in a document that best represent key concepts, and uses those sentences to give users a quick summary of the entire document.

Dynamic Clustering

Allows a user to point CAAT to a set of documents and then allow CAAT to dynamically group conceptually-similar documents together in a tree-type hierarchy and finally apply a descriptive title to each cluster of documents.

Near Duplicate Document Detection

Uses CAAT’s Dynamic Clustering to identify and group documents that are duplicates or near-duplicate documents as well as identifying the extent of duplication.

 

More information on the iReview Discovery Platform is available by clicking here or calling Global EDD Group @ +1.888.690.DATA

Filed Under: Global EDD Group, Tech Bytes Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

The Death of Google Buzz Officially in Sight

October 16, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Google is nuking its Twitter clone in a couple of weeks in favor of loving its new social website big-time.

Zoom

Friday Google said in a blog that it plans to kill Google Buzz and the Buzz API in a couple of weeks. The news isn’t surprising given that the Twitter clone really never caught on, and that Google’s new social site is “all the buzz” for the immediate future.

“In a few weeks we’ll shut down Google Buzz and the Buzz API, and focus instead on Google+,” the company said. “While people obviously won’t be able to create new posts after that, they will be able to view their existing content on their Google Profile, and download it using Google Takeout.”

The news arrives after Google recently said that it plans to shut down additional services like Notebook, Aardvark, Google Desktop, Google Pack and more. Friday Google added that Google Labs, Code Search and the Code Search API will be discontinued in January 2012 as well as Jaiku, a product Google acquired back in 2007 that let users send updates to friends, and the social features in iGoogle.

via The Death of Google Buzz Officially in Sight.

Filed Under: Tech Bytes Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Allen Systems Group (ASG) Acquires Intelligent Search Firm RiverGlass – MarketWatch

October 12, 2011 By Leave a Comment

ASG Software Solutions, a leader in IT infrastructure, content management and cloud computing software solutions for global enterprises, announced today that it has acquired RiverGlass, a leading provider of eDiscovery, advanced information collection, data management and analysis solutions. The integration of RiverGlass’ robust intelligent search technologies with ASG’s content management solutions will provide ASG customers with improved capabilities in data collection, management of structured and unstructured data, and access to meaningful analytics.

“At ASG our mission is to help customers optimize their IT environments by providing solutions to enhance efficiency, minimize risk and manage costs. It is critical for enterprises to have easy to deploy tools that manage ongoing data growth,” said Arthur Allen, president and chief executive officer at ASG. “By integrating RiverGlass’ technologies into our portfolio, we can help our customers gain control and better visibility into their business data.”

RiverGlass was formed in 2003 and is based in Champaign, Illinois. The RiverGlass offering was built leveraging eight years and $20mm of R&D efforts from the former Mosaic development teams at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). Their intelligent search solutions provide search and monitoring capabilities across internal (customer) databases and repositories as well as structured and unstructured web based data. These tools are currently at work in government, law enforcement agencies, law firms, e-discovery service providers and major corporations.

via Allen Systems Group (ASG) Acquires Intelligent Search Firm RiverGlass – MarketWatch.

Filed Under: From The News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Google’s Expanded Privacy Tools Span Search, Ads, Chrome, YouTube, Gmail – Security – News & Reviews – eWeek.com

September 22, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Google takes a lot of heat over user privacy, much of it well deserved after exposing privacy for Google Buzz users early on and snorting users email, computer passwords and browser data from 2007 to 2010 from users’ WiFi networks. Few people who aren’t diehard Google Watchers know this, but the company has actually baked a lot of user privacy tools into its various software products. That includes protections for users of its search, Gmail, Chrome Web browser, Google Maps, YouTube, among other services. Even Google’s often maligned advertising products, the services that make 97 percent of the company’s money, have tools to shore up user data privacy. Take a look at eWEEK’s quick tour of Google’s privacy tools.

via Google’s Expanded Privacy Tools Span Search, Ads, Chrome, YouTube, Gmail – Security – News & Reviews – eWeek.com.

Filed Under: Tech Bytes Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,
« Older Posts