With many upload formats, we can auto-detect and set standard metadata fields for your deposition & courtroom transcripts, but what about when the format isn’t playing nice?  It can be mildly annoying to manually key the data for a single transcript, but doing it for a larger set can be downright frustrating.

Not a problem; by including a loadfile, you’ll have all of your meta preset on completion of your import…  So, how does it work?

1. Gather your transcripts/depositions together (most simply by putting ‘em under some main directory).

2. Create a csv loadfile in that directory with metadata information.

• Courtroom transcript loadfiles should be named “transcripts.csv” and contain the fields: filename, date, title, description
• Deposition transcript loadfiles should be named “depositions.csv” and contain the fields: filename, date, volume, lastname, firstname, middleinit, name_suffix, deposition_type

3. Create a zip file of the transcripts, depositions, and loadfiles, and load it as a batch of depositions or transcripts. The information from the loadfiles will take precedence over other information, so you can even combine depositions and transcripts into one batch.

Notes:

• The filename is full path/name to the file, relative to the location of the loadfile.  (If the filename starts with “/”, it’s an absolute path within the zip file.)
• The name_suffix is like “Jr.”, “M.D.”, “III”, etc.
• The deponent_type corresponds to deponent types in the web app, and defaults to “General”.
• The fields are expected to be in-order just like in an OLL file, so make sure you include a blank for any data you don’t have, such as a middle initial.
• You’re welcome to include a row with the column headings for your reference; it will be automatically detected and ignored by the importer.
• The importer will try to auto-detect any information you don’t specify through the loadfile, such as a volume number, etc.

The rest of the fields should be fairly self-explanatory.  As always, we’re more than happy to assist with any questions or troubleshooting via your Nextpoint rep or at support@nextpoint.com.

Whether you’re a Mac or a PC, one thing is for certain: The Mac ranks in the legal world have never been stronger and continue to grow.  The conversion is not without it’s bumps and bruises, as many are discovering when it comes to viewing transcripts stored in the PTX format.

One of the great benefits of web-based applications is the ability to be (largely) hardware/operating system independent.  We’re announcing our most recent example: PTX support on the Nextpoint trial application.  By bringing PTX support to the web, users with any mix of hardware and operating system will have access to view and work with PTX files.  All you need is a browser and an internet connection.

Once your PTX has been uploaded and processed, all of our Deposition/Transcript tools are at your disposal: (Re)view, designate, link to related documents/exhibits, etc.

Deposition/Transcripts Tour on Nextpoint.com

]]> http://nextpointlab.com/2009/06/26/bringing-ptx-support-to-the-mac-and-beyond/feed/ 0 jameshalberg deposition vid http://nextpointlab.com/2009/06/17/theres-web-apps-and-then-theres-web-apps/ http://nextpointlab.com/2009/06/17/theres-web-apps-and-then-theres-web-apps/#comments Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:15:17 +0000 Jim Fiorato http://nextpointlab.wordpress.com/?p=484 ]]>

Naturally, I’ve been reflecting about the applications I’ve worked on prior to coming to The Lab, and comparing those applications with what we’ve got here. One of the things that always comes to mind is how the definition of web app can vary so vastly from place to place. I can say I’ve worked on them for the last 10 years, but I think this is the first one that truly fits the bill.

There are many vendors out there touting their software as a web app, but usually this software comes with some of the baggage you’d expect out of an old school client/server application. “One instance per client” apps where client by client upgrades and maintenance scale so poorly that vendors and clients alike spend so much time and money coordinating, the benefits of “access from anywhere” quickly wither away.

True Web Apps should deliver not only on the promise of “access from anywhere”, but also the promise of “update everywhere”.  From a consumer’s perspective it’s wonderful to save the worry of coordinating upgrades, from an IT department’s perspective it’s wonderful to get rid of the headache of having to maintain the environment, and from the vendor’s perspective it’s wonderful to have simple deployments of updates. It’s wonderful for all.

So, do you have a web app or do you have a Web App?

Everybody is concerned with limiting the amount of data that needs to be reviewed.  It’s the number one cost in e-discovery after all. Clearly, the best way to conserve costs is to review less and there is a technique that we software engineers use every day that can drastically reduce the amount of documents in review. A concept from CS101 called normalization. Essentially, it’s a mechanism for ensuring the integrity and efficiency of a database and provides a framework for specifying the degree in which redundant data needs to be stored. Our goal is to remove redundant data while providing an elegant means of searching and reviewing hierarchical document sets in context.

So here is the typical example we see in e-discovery review.

Email 1 has two attachments, Attachment 1 and Attachment 2
Email 2 has one attachment, Attachment 1

There are much more complex examples of this as well, but this should illustrate the point just fine. Attachment 1 is a duplicate file, meaning it is literally the exact same file, with exactly the same metadata, and the same md5 hash. The only difference is that in one situation it’s attached to Email 1 and in another it’s attached to Email 2.

Most review applications will keep duplicate copies of the attachment and group with the parent emails, essentially flattening the attachment with the email and creating multiple versions of the same pages.  If you choose (or are forced) to review Attachment 1 as two completely different documents in this manor as most common review tools require, you are going to be significantly increasing the time to review, tag, and code that document. Not only that, but you are going to increase the possibility of a redaction not being applied to all versions of that document.

That said, it’s clearly important to look at emails and their attachments together to get the full context of the material. Using the above example, we’ll add titles to each of the docs.

Email 1 Q1 summary has two attachments, Attachment 1 Q1_financials.doc and Attachment 2 Q1_goals.doc
Email 2 Here are the falsified numbers you asked for Jim, Attachment 1 Q1 financials.doc

Even if Email 1 and Email 2 get assigned to different reviewers and they both have to review Attachment 1, the redactions, tagging, and coding information will be available for the other reviewer making the process more efficient than working on that attachment from scratch. You’ve saved yourself a big chunk of time. And in an ideal situation, the same reviewer will already be familiar with that document and see the additional context of both emails during his review. As he’s reviewing Q1_finanicals.doc he’ll know that it was sent out in a Q1 summary email and also in an email announcing that the numbers were falsified. So it’s not only more efficient, it actually sets a greater context for the document and provides additional valuable meta data.

Unfortunately, most review tools that we’ve seen don’t support this normalized relational database technique but our hope is that as more review tools extend to support native file formats this technique for organizing review databases will be available for all.  Our simple and powerful review platform maintains the relationships between all documents and allows for flattening or “reduping” on export or production.  It’s an approach that really provides the best of both worlds.

It’s time we got serious on this blog.

The Nextpoint Lab is located in Madison, WI and like any good Wisconsin guys n’ gals, we look forward to a summer filled with some serious grilling out.  What better way to truly kick of summer than with the world’s largest grill?

Photo is from our lunchtime voyage out to Bratfest – where they sold 191,712 brats last Memorial Day weekend.  No, that is not a mistake: almost 200,000 brats!  We’ll all be doing our part this weekend to run that total up and help out the charities involved.

Applying stamps to documents and exhibits has, historically, been a painful task: put a stamp on every page in this file cabinet.  For some shops, the process has actually become more cumbersome with the introduction of electronic evidence: print everything on this hard drive – stamp it – scan it back in.

In the past week I noticed a way to improve the process involving the purchase/use of Adobe Acrobat.  It takes a bit of setup and involves a (somewhat) manual process.  Some of that work can be reduced with custom scripts and load files and really, if the pricing on the automated solution looks like this… I’ve gotta say I’m more than willing to put in the effort.

Luckily, you have more options.

There are other free tools that can provide you with your customized stamps at a level of automation that will save you tons of time (and thus still more money) – all with a much friendlier interface… but you’re gonna have to do-it-yourself.  Here’s how we did it:

FREE tools we use to stamp:

• GD2 – Image manipulation
• PDF::Writer for Ruby – Create new/replacement PDFs
• Ghostscript – PDF Interpreter
• Ruby on Rails – We’re getting down and dirty with these tools but our clients shouldn’t have to.  Rails let’s us build an easy-to-use web interface.

So, why are we tipping our hand and revealing our secrets? Well, a couple reasons:

1. We have a great app and provide a great service. We are quite proud of the application and service that we provide.  No installation (just need a web browser) and very easy to use.
2. We’re not free, but we’re damn close. Check out our pricing.  We’ll charge you a little more than $50/mo for a GB of data and throw in the stamps (and MUCH more – stamping is just the tip of the iceberg) for free.  Just want to stamp and leave to avoid the recurring charges?  That’s fine – we’ll let you out after the first month – no charges for leaving and taking your data with you.

How can we afford such madness?  I just showed you what we’re using.  Our costs are low – why should yours be high?

Give us a call and we’ll setup a demo.  You’ll like it.

Ensuring confidential/secure data remains confidential and secure is vital at every stage of litigation.  Nowhere are you at more risk than when data is literally in someone’s hands… their laptop.  We’ve posted before about how encrypting data on your laptop makes it harder to steal, but not impossible. Even strategies that are “unbeatable” today are probably just waiting for someone with the proper motivation to take them down.

I was reminded of this again today while reading “Laying Someone Off? Better Check That Laptop”, from The National Law Journal. When people get fired they get frustrated; and when they get frustrated they may do some things they normally wouldn’t do. If that something involves taking (or harming) electronic data — a lot of damage can be done; and fast.

This has been a problem for a long time. Occasionally, security will “walk someone out” to avoid a physical conflict but more often they’re making sure someone’s last hour of work isn’t spent downloading files and loading their briefcase. But what about when someone gets wind of the impending cuts a little early – or they happen to have forgotten their laptop at home that fateful day?

I’m not naive enough to think that your work laptop will have literally zero confidential data on it, but using a SaaS solution for your case management tool can certainly go a long way. You have literally millions of pages of evidence for your case — while no one has downloaded all of that (which is another reason why you are better served not depending on a laptop as your storage location, but I digress) … they might start looking for some key docs when they get the bad news. We can cut that access off in literally one second.

Piling on, Rocket Matter posted another great point about depending on your laptop as a data storage location today, Minimizing Downtime. If you’re without that machine for a few days: what does that cost you? … and that’s assuming you’ve been religiously backing it up.  Have you?

Designating “related documents” can be a tedious task.  You know that anything containing your search terms should be designated, but even electronically – visiting hundreds of documents to add a designation is tedious (at best).

We’ve made some enhancements to make that process much less of a headache.

new "Apply to Related Docs" is circled above

Here’s what you’re asking for by checking either of the boxes:

• Attached Docs – If there are any emails in the set you are editing:  You will also be designating their attachments.
• Parent Emails – If any of the docs in your set were email attachments:  You will also be designating the emails they were attached to.

We’ve also added this feature to the tool for designating individual documents.

We really feel like this is going to improve the review and coding experience dramatically.  As always, we’d love to hear your feedback.

How do we design new features at Nextpoint?  We identify the essence of a feature and get it in the hands of users.  Typically it goes something like this:

1.  We brainstorm… use our imaginations and throw out a lot of “wouldn’t it be cool ifs” without any real consequence.

2.  Identify the major technical hurdles.  Inevitably there are a few.  And that’s a great place to start from a execution standpoint.  Build the proof of concept and make sure it’s doable.

3.  Strip it down.  We’ve already brainstormed all of the details and complexities.  So we just peel ‘em away until we are left with the absolute minimal amount necessary to get the core benefit of the functionality complete.  And recognize that we might be leaving a ton of other potential benefits on the table.

4.  Release.  Get it out there and in use as soon as possible.

5.  Improve it based on real-world user feedback.  Often times the ideas during the brainstorming phase come back… but surprisingly many of them never do.  And if they do, we already have an understanding of the concept and have discussed where it fits and the difficulties with implementation.

So basically, we branch out and explore the feature.  Let the scope fly wildly out of control but only on whiteboards and in our imaginations.  And then strip it down to the essence, get in use, and respond to real user feedback.

Our settings section was recently the recipient of a facelift and the results are fantastic.  Improvements to organization, navigation, and all around usability make it simpler to understand and modify for your specific needs.

Create and Edit Designation Labels, Issues, Objection Types, and Custom Fields.