Tech Industry's Growing Regulatory Problems May Be E-discovery's Opportunity
Regulatory interest in the tech industry doesn't appear to be dying down any time soon, but that could potentially be good news for e-discovery experts or providers looking for their next gig.
September 26, 2019 at 11:15 AM
3 minute read
Tech companies like Google, Facebook and Amazon are attempting to navigate a tight 30-day deadline imposed by the House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee earlier this month for the production of key business documents. However, continuing regulatory activity in the tech space could spur demand for more e-discovery resources and skill well beyond October.
Think of it like dominoes. Per Mary Mack, executive director of the Association of Certified E-Discovery Specialists (ACEDS), antitrust investigations tend to spawn other actions that involve e-discovery.
"You've got governmental inquiries and then you can get some civil suits… and then there's shareholders suits. There could be states and other governmental units. So it tends to get bigger and more and more actions based on the same data set," Mack said.
With multiple actions comes a variety of deadlines, production schedules and formats that need to be serviced, which could strain whatever pre-existing e-discovery resources that companies or their outside counsel already maintain.
On top of those demands, organizations also have to possess enough manpower to withstand vacation or sick days that might otherwise hinder progress. Mack expects to see e-discovery teams bulking up.
"The folks that are doing that front end identification of where everything is and how to get it out, they'll be in the first demand. Then, the data reduction and analytics people," Mack said.
Whether or not that talent is brought in-house or leveraged via the services of an outside e-discovery provider is anybody's guess.
Wendy King, senior managing director at FTI Consulting, agrees that as long as regulatory activity continues on an upswing, e-discovery professionals who have experience with large data volumes and short time-frames will continue to be in high demand.
She thinks corporations will likely mix bolstering their own internal teams with assistance from external providers, but the exact ratio is likely to come down to cost effectiveness.
"Having that blend where you've got the internal expertise that can work with external experts as well will give [companies] a really balanced approach," King said, "so that they can continue to, as they implement [e-discovery] programs, really maintain those and support them."
The sensitive nature of some of the documents being produced may also impact staffing strategies. In the case of the House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee inquiry, for example, companies are being directed to provide internal communications, data related to mergers and acquisitions and other information that could be subject to privilege.
While Michael Pontrelli, managing director at the e-discovery and managed review provider Consilio, doesn't necessarily believe that the regulatory interest in the tech industry is creating new corporate job opportunities in e-discovery, he does foresee a need for specialized assistance with some of the more delicate information that's coming into play.
"I think given the highly sensitive nature of the requests in each of these inquiries, [tech companies] will need to rely on both outside counsel and a very robust e-discovery provider that has had experience working on these types of productions for these committee inquiries and other regulator investigations," Pontrelli said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250