Login | March 18, 2019

Using Onna platform for e-discovery

Technology for Lawyers

Published: June 8, 2018

Onna has developed what looks like a very robust e-discovery platform. It now comes recommended by Josh “Bowtie” Gilliland, one of the leading e-discovery tech writers, so I’m recommending a look just based on that, although I haven’t directly communicated with him about it. I have no connection with this company.

To begin-- specific pricing for the Onna e-discovery platform is not available on the company’s website, but it certainly does not look cheap.

But what it does look like is a platform that can run complex and complete e-discovery searches from a desktop. The platform can be used by defendants to preserve ESI under a preservation letter or order, or used by either side to search through data to find relevant ESI.

Bowtie recently wrote that the platform helps in balancing the need for data acquisition versus the problem of over-collection, and helps to ensure that relevant information is collected that is proportional to the needs of the case.

The platform collects any relevant information from any cloud-based storage apps in real time, whether open or behind firewalls. This includes the usual suspects: Dropbox, Gmail, Slack, Zendesk, and enterprise sources like Microsoft 365 and G Suite. In other words—wherever data is stored on the cloud.

The data can then be produced or preserved through its API based on a set of parameters developed by the user, as well as some presets provided by the company. It uses the now-familiar AI machine learning techniques to train the system to identify relevant searches. The searches run by natural language processing and optical character reader (OCR).

Then access is team-oriented on a granular basis. Each team member has personal access settings, and can share documents, files and images through the portal.

If the data is acquired though a user’s account, the platform uses the appropriate authentication and permissions.

After acquisition, the data is broken down into folders, channels, or smaller units, which hopefully limits the problem of over-collection.

Then the users can create an audit log to show what was collected for chain of custody questions.

Again, I haven’t seen a demo of Onna, but it certainly looks worth a look. https://onna.com/ediscovery.