Adam Kuhn of OpenText reports in an article headed SDNY Rejects Challenges to TAR Process Despite Missteps, Upholds Reasonableness Standard on a case in the Southern District of New York whose focus is on the transparency required from a party using technology-assisted review.
The receiving party identified some apparent errors in the production (later described as de minimis) and asked the court to order that more information be provided about how the exercise was conducted.
Although the court did order the defendant to amplify in one respect on information given to the plaintiffs, the defendant’s method was generally approved.
The cased raised questions about the degree of transparency required from a party using technology-assisted review and about the relative merits of TAR 1.0 (requiring the use of seed sets) and the continuous machine learning approach used by OpenText.
The article contains links to other OpenText resources useful to those who are keen to understand the different approaches to the use of technology-assisted review and the efficiencies which can be achieved.