'Fake It Until You Make It': Lawsuit Claims Hanzo Archives Pushed Fake AI Products to Law Firms
The whistleblower lawsuit claims Hanzo employees were manually conducting web searches for clients because its artificial intelligence platform was not functioning.
September 04, 2019 at 04:02 PM
3 minute read
A former employee's whistleblower lawsuit accuses e-discovery company Hanzo Archives of falsely promoting one of its products as running on artificial intelligence.
The lawsuit was filed by a former Hanzo Archives marketer who claims she and others were tasked with manually performing web searches for clients because the company's artificial intelligence platform was not functioning. The company would then manually input the investigation results into its customer portal to create the false appearance that they were generated by artificial intelligence, the suit claims. Meanwhile, senior Hanzo officials repeatedly warned the plaintiff not to tell clients about the manual investigations.
Courtney Subocz, a product director for the company's Dynamic Investigator product, claims she was fired after emailing colleagues to complain that the company's conduct amounted to consumer fraud.
Hanzo Archives promoted its Dynamic Investigator platform as being able to "supercharge digital investigations," and as using "powerful algorithms to search and analyze mountains of online data, identifying subjects across the web and social media sites." But Subocz said the company decided to start selling that product around November 2018, "long before Hanzo Dynamic Investigator was close to being able to function as advertised." At that point it had "no functioning artificial intelligence platform, nor any algorithms capable of analyzing any data, much less mountains of data," the suit claims.
Subocz claims various employees told her that if she did not give the sales department a product to sell, they would "create one for you," according to the suit, which describes Hanzo's product strategy as "fake it until you make it."
When Hanzo was hired to vet 219 potential jurors and to monitor social media postings of those jurors who were selected, the company falsely told its client that it was using artificial intelligence to perform the job. But the work was actually done manually by Subocz and other people working for Hanzo, the suit claims.
Subocz says she received multiple accolades from her employer for her job performance, as well as an Amazon gift card and assignments to speak on behalf of the company at various conferences. But she complained numerous times to senior managers about the fraudulent representations.
On March 12, at 9:55 a.m., Subocz expressed her objections in an email that she sent to the human resources director and several senior officials of the company. Within five minutes of sending the email, she was told by the human resources director and chief technology officer that her employment was being terminated effective immediately.
Subocz, a Brick Township resident, filed the suit in Ocean County Superior Court on July 23. Hanzo Archives, based in New York, its parent company, Hanzo Archives Limited, based in Great Britain, as well as the company's chief executive, Keith Laska, are named as defendants. The defendants removed the lawsuit to federal court in Trenton on Aug. 30.
The suit claims Subocz's firing was contrary to public policy and violated the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act. Subocz seeks compensatory and punitive damages as well as attorney fees and costs.
Subocz's suit was filed by Douglas Bramley of McMoran, O'Connor, Bramley & Burns in Manasquan, who declined to comment. Hanzo and its attorney, David Strand of Fisher & Phillips, did not respond to a request for comment.
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 AllMidlevel Associates Angered by Lack of Tech Investment
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'If You Love What You Do and Put the Time and Effort Into It, You Will Excel,' Says Lisa Saul of Forde & O'Meara
- 5Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
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