Drafting comprehensive ESI protocols requires hours of research across FRCP rules, local court guidelines, and industry best practices. Attorneys must manually compile definitions, preservation requirements, production specifications, and cost-sharing provisions while ensuring compliance with evolving e-discovery standards. The process is time-intensive, repetitive, and prone to omissions that can lead to discovery disputes.
Drafting comprehensive e-discovery protocols requires deep technical knowledge, careful attention to Federal Rules compliance, and hours of negotiation over search terms, production formats, and preservation obligations. Manual drafting often results in incomplete protocols that lead to costly discovery disputes and court intervention.
CaseMark automates ESI protocol creation by generating comprehensive, court-ready agreements tailored to your case. Our AI analyzes your case documents and produces detailed protocols covering preservation, search methodology, TAR procedures, production specifications, and dispute resolution—all compliant with FRCP Rules 26, 34, and 37.
This workflow is applicable across multiple practice areas and use cases
Class action litigation involves massive volumes of ESI across multiple parties and custodians, requiring sophisticated protocols for preservation, processing, and cost allocation among parties.
Class actions generate enormous ESI volumes requiring technology-assisted review, coordinated preservation across numerous custodians, and detailed cost-sharing arrangements, making ESI protocols absolutely essential for case management.
Employment litigation cases routinely involve extensive ESI discovery including emails, personnel files, timekeeping systems, and HR databases requiring comprehensive ESI protocols.
Employment cases generate substantial electronically stored information from multiple sources (email, HRIS, payroll systems) and frequently involve disputes over discovery scope, making ESI protocols essential for managing discovery efficiently.
IP litigation involves complex ESI discovery of source code, design files, CAD drawings, patent prosecution files, and technical communications requiring detailed production format specifications.
Intellectual property cases often involve highly technical ESI, proprietary information requiring strict confidentiality protocols, and technology-assisted review for large document sets, making comprehensive ESI protocols critical.
Data breach litigation and regulatory investigations require ESI protocols addressing sensitive personal information, incident response data, and security logs while ensuring compliance with privacy regulations.
Cybersecurity litigation involves highly sensitive ESI containing personal data, requiring specialized handling protocols, enhanced confidentiality provisions, and careful coordination between discovery obligations and privacy law compliance.
Bankruptcy adversary proceedings and preference actions involve extensive financial ESI discovery including accounting systems, transaction databases, and email communications requiring structured ESI protocols.
Bankruptcy litigation frequently involves voluminous financial records in electronic format, multiple parties with competing interests, and court oversight requiring clear ESI protocols for efficient discovery management.
An ESI protocol is a stipulated agreement between parties that governs electronic discovery procedures, typically entered as a court order. It establishes the framework for preserving, searching, reviewing, and producing electronically stored information. Courts increasingly require ESI protocols under Rule 26(f) to prevent discovery disputes and ensure proportional, efficient e-discovery in complex litigation.
CaseMark's ESI protocol generator incorporates requirements from FRCP Rules 26, 34, and 37, including proportionality factors under Rule 26(b)(1), production format specifications under Rule 34(b)(2)(E), and preservation obligations under Rule 37(e). The tool also integrates best practices from The Sedona Principles and the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) to ensure court approval.
Yes, CaseMark generates detailed provisions for keyword searching, Boolean operators, and technology-assisted review (TAR) methodologies including continuous active learning and predictive coding. The protocol includes testing procedures, validation metrics, and transparency requirements that can be customized based on your case complexity and the parties' technical capabilities.
Absolutely. Every CaseMark ESI protocol includes comprehensive privilege protection procedures with detailed privilege log requirements, redaction protocols, and a Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) clawback agreement. This protects against privilege waiver from inadvertent disclosure while establishing clear procedures for handling privileged materials discovered during review.
CaseMark protocols include detailed cost allocation provisions that specify which party bears preservation, collection, processing, review, and production costs. The protocol incorporates Rule 26(b)(2)(B) cost-shifting procedures for not reasonably accessible ESI and establishes proportionality-based frameworks for allocating expenses related to technology-assisted review, foreign language translation, and specialized processing.