Thomas Lidbury Thomas Lidbury of Ogletree. Lidbury, Ogletree Deakins' newest Indianapolis office shareholder and head of the firm's e-discovery and records release practice group, has watched e-discovery develop steadily since he began in the space toward the end of the 1990s and doesn't see any need to panic. “ The innovations are here. Discovery practitioners need to focus on mastering the existing technology and work flows to deliver service better, faster and cheaper,” Lidbury told LTN. In his new role at the firm, Lidbury will be charged with helping clients develop and maintain records retention and information governance programs. He caught up with LTN to talk about the new role and his thoughts about the e-discovery industry: How did you initially find your way into e-discovery work? I was at a big firm in the late 1990s working on complex cases that included large volumes of discovery. We didn't call it “e” discovery yet, and we often received documents from our clients in paper form only to scan back into electronic format. When the firm created a dedicated e-discovery practice group in the early 2000s, I was drafted as the senior associate for the group. I later became a partner and co-leader of the group. It was a learning process for everyone—us, our clients, the courts, opposing counsel and the software providers. Initially, there was at least as much work involving establishing processes at our clients for legal holds and data collections as there was on the right side of the [Electronic Discovery Reference Model]. Now that you've worked in a few different e-discovery practices, where do you see some of the biggest challenges for firms in managing an e-discovery practice? I think many firms struggle with the question of whether to invest in the software and support capabilities necessary to provide full service e-discovery services to their clients. One of the attractions of Ogletree Deakins to me is that it has robust capabilities. Ogletree Deakins has a robust Relativity platform, established litigation support teams and review centers. Having overseen a great number of changes in e-discovery practice, what do you think is the next step in e-discovery innovation? Where do you imagine the industry is headed next? I don't see major advances in technology on the horizon. The software is mature and powerful. Predictive coding technology and workflows are well established and defensible. The innovations are here. Discovery practitioners need to focus on mastering the existing technology and work flows to deliver service better, faster and cheaper. How do you imagine use of AI in e-discovery is likely to evolve in coming years? I'm not sure. Every “AI” that I have seen boils down to some kind of algorithmic categorization. The predictive coding workflow leverages this technology. I haven't seen anything really new. I think predictive coding will continue to be the norm for the foreseeable future. Do you see a need to balance e-discovery innovation (especially given the increasing budgetary constraints most firms are facing) with the need for defensibility? Innovation and defensibility do not need to be competing considerations. Predictive coding is quite defensible. Practitioners should learn how to use it effectively and efficiently. The innovations are defensible, so go ahead and use them to do discovery more efficiently. It is a win-win. What are some projects you're hoping to get started to kick off your work with Ogletree Deakins? Ogletree Deakins has a robust e-discovery platform and practice. My major project is to grow the practice.