Electronic Document Policy Discussion

1
Electronic Document Policy Discussion

• Carmelo D. Bramante
• CDB Consultancy LLC
• PRIA Annual Conference
• Charlotte, NC
• July 24,2007

2
Discussion Recording Background

• Purpose
• Lien perfection priority
• Protection of subsequent purchases
• History preservation and accessibility of title
  records
• Notices
• Actual
• Constructive record or inquiry
• Processes
• Document presentment, may include an envelope or
  package
• Cashiering payment of fees
• Document stamping, e.g., book and page,
  instrument number
• Document examination
• Indexing
• Scanning and/or microfilming
• Record retrieval and archives
• Documents and Envelope
• Paper

3
THANK YOU

• Carmelo D. Bramante
• CDB Consultancy LLC
• 202-441-1396
• carmen_at_cdbconsultancy.com

4
Intelligent Document Policy Discussion

• Chris Christensen
• Intelligent Document Policy Discussion
• Charlotte, N.C.
• July 24, 2007

5
UETA and Metadata

• Comment 5 to Section 8 of UETA
• There are circumstances where a party providing
  certain information may wish to inhibit retention
  in order to protect intellectual property rights
  or prevent the other party from retaining
  confidential information about the sender
• In such cases inhibition is understandable, but
  if the sender wishes to enforce the record in
  which the information is contained, the sender
  may not inhibit its retention by the recipient

6
UETA and Metadata

• Comment 3 to Section 12 of UETA
• What information must be retained is determined
  by the purpose for which the information is
  needed
• If the addressing and pathway information
  regarding an e-mail is relevant, then that
  information should also be retained
• However if it is the substance of the e-mail that
  is relevant, only that information need be
  retained

7
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

• The FRCP amendments are silent on Metadata
• Committee Notes to Rule 26(f) recognize, however
• Computer programs may retain draft language,
  editorial comments, and other deleted matter
  (sometimes referred to as embedded data or
  embedded edits) in an electronic file but not
  make them apparent to the reader.
• Information describing the history, tracking, or
  management of an electronic file (sometimes
  called metadata) is usually not apparent to the
  reader viewing a hard copy or a screen image.
• Whether this information should be produced may
  be among the topics discussed in the Rule 26(f)
  conference.

8
Metadata Cases

• Wyeth v. Impax Laboratories, Inc., 2006 U.S.
  Dist. LEXIS 79761, 2006 WL 3091331 (D. Del. 2006)
• Emerging standards of electronic discovery
  appear to articulate a general presumption
  against the production of metadata
• Most metadata is of limited evidentiary value,
  and reviewing it can waste litigation resources

9
Metadata Cases

• Williams v. Sprint/United Mgmt. Co., 230 F.R.D.
  640, 652 (D. Kan. 2005)
• The producing party should produce the
  electronic documents with their metadata intact,
  unless that party timely objects to production of
  metadata, the parties agree that the metadata
  should not be produced, or the producing party
  requests a protective order