quinn emanuel
quinn emanuel urquhart & sullivan, llp | business litigation report
INSIDE
Practice Area Updates:
Copyright Litigation
Page 5
Bankruptcy Litigation
Page 5
Class Action Litigation
Page 6
Appellate Litigation
Page 7
London Litigation
Page 8
Victory for Vermillion Inc.
and Bio-Rad in High-Stakes
Arbitration and Other
Victories
Page 10
Attorney Advertising
November 2012
los angeles | new york | san francisco | silicon valley | chicago | washington, d.c. | tokyo | london | mannheim | moscow | hamburg
(continued on page 2)
Predictive Coding Comes of Age
So-called “predictive coding”—using a small number
of manually-coded documents to analyze and predict
appropriate coding for a much larger set of documents
—has become a hot topic in e-discovery. is past
year brought the rst reported judicial decisions
explicitly authorizing the practice. 2012 also saw
some of the rst disputes concerning the appropriate
methodologies for this technique.
In coming years, the use of predictive coding will
continue to grow as litigants seek to limit discovery
costs. Judges may also continue to endorse the
practice, even incorporating it into model e-discovery
orders. But early adopters should proceed with
caution; the practice is likely to generate many disputes
as acceptable methodologies and best practices are
established.
e Evolution of Computer-Assisted Document
Review
As companies have moved away from paper le systems
and toward electronically stored information (ESI),
the number of documents that must be collected
and reviewed in civil litigation has skyrocketed. A
number of technologies have been used to handle
this explosion in discoverable information. Predictive
coding is the latest technical evolution for reviewing
and producing large data sets.
Manual Review: Not long ago, manual, linear,
“eyes-on-the-page” analysis was the predominant
method of document review. e process started
with collecting documents that were potentially
responsive to formal requests for production. e
data collections, especially in complex civil litigation,
often contained millions of pages. A small army
of junior associates, contract attorneys, and even
paralegals would then mobilize to manually review
the documents for responsiveness, privilege, and
condentiality.
Although many still consider manual review to
be the “gold standard,” it is rife with performance
Amy Candido, Diane Doolittle and Susan Estrich Recognized
as “Top Women Lawyers”
Quinn Emanuel partners Amy Candido,
Diane Doolittle and Susan Estrich have
been named “Top Women Lawyers”
by e Daily Journal. is list honored
leading female attorneys in various
practice areas whose accomplishments
made a signicant impact.
Intellectual property litigator Amy
Candido was recognized for her work
successfully defending Google Inc. in two
patent jury trials in the Eastern District
of Texas. Candido also represented
HTC Corp. in a proceeding before
the International Trade Commission
in which HTC Corp. obtained a nal
determination of non-infringement and
invalidity for several Apple Inc. patents.
Diane Doolittle, Co-Chair of Quinn
Emanuel’s National Trial Practice,
was recognized for her successful
representation of Southern California
real estate developer Donald Bren in a
jury trial against his children and their
mother who accused Bren of cheating
them out of child support payments. e
jury verdict was recently armed by the
California Court of Appeal.
Susan Estrich, Chair of the rm’s
Public Strategy Practice, legal and
political analyst for Fox News, and Robert
Kingsley Professor of Law and Political
Science at the USC Gould School
of Law, was selected for her trial and
public communications strategy work
on behalf of both TCW Group Inc. and
Mattel Inc.
Quinn Emanuel Adds More International Arbitration Stars
see page 11
Q
