Scanned pleadings, correspondence and exhibits were stored as sequential images without matter-level metadata. For the Closed-Matter Document Index for Due Diligence in United States workload, reviewers spent additional time opening individual files because filenames and folder locations did not answer common retrieval questions.
A litigation practice preparing a searchable archive for internal research and due diligence.
The primary client-side owner was the Litigation Support Manager. That role coordinated source access, destination rules, reviewer availability and acceptance of each delivery. SDES would provide controlled production capacity; the client would retain authority over the business meaning of the records.
Problem: Scanned pleadings, correspondence and exhibits were stored as sequential images without matter-level metadata. For the Closed-Matter Document Index for Due Diligence in United States workload, reviewers spent additional time opening individual files because filenames and folder locations did not answer common retrieval questions.
Required solution: Documents were classified using the firm’s taxonomy and linked to confirmed matter, date and document references; unreadable pages were escalated. For Closed-Matter Document Index for Due Diligence in United States, each index row retained its source filename or document reference, and unclear classifications were separated for records-owner review.
Planned outcome: The legal team received a searchable matter index while classification and privilege decisions remained with counsel. After completing Closed-Matter Document Index for Due Diligence in United States, the archive became easier to migrate, audit and retrieve without losing the link to the original source files.
The completed scope covered 31,600 document images across 1,280 closed matters — completed in 9 weeks. Effort also reflected field count, document readability, relationship complexity, exception frequency and destination validation.
The client defines required fields, accepted formats, controlling sources and decisions that must be escalated. The operating guide records those boundaries before entry begins.
The review covered the stated volume of 31,600 document images across 1,280 closed matters — completed in 9 weeks, including ordinary records, incomplete sources and difficult relationships.
The pilot uses Pleadings, correspondence, orders, exhibits, matter lists and document-taxonomy guidance. Questions are returned with exact record and source references so approved answers can enter the production guide.
Matter-family pilot, weekly archive batches and a final matter-to-file reconciliation. Completed, held, excluded and rejected items remain distinguishable throughout production.
Matter correspondence, document grouping, taxonomy compliance, date capture and page-range continuity receive focused checks. Unsupported assumptions do not enter the clean output merely to complete a record.
Batch totals, exception counts and source manifests are compared before final release. The handoff identifies what was delivered, held and returned for client direction.
The review focus would cover Matter correspondence, document grouping, taxonomy compliance, date capture and page-range continuity. Sampling depth and second-pass review would be agreed according to field significance and source quality rather than advertised as an unsupported universal accuracy percentage.
Matter folders were assigned under restricted access and no document content was altered.
Counsel retained privilege, relevance, legal classification and disclosure decisions.
Litigation Support Manager or another authorised owner would resolve exceptions that change meaning, identity, status, classification or commercial treatment. SDES would document the question and apply only the approved resolution.
The handoff would follow the destination structure and preserve enough source information for review and recovery. Delivery timing would follow Matter-family pilot, weekly archive batches and a final matter-to-file reconciliation.
Matter-level document index
grouped-document manifest
unreadable-page queue and coverage summary
The client would validate the pilot before scale and review each scheduled release. Rejections caused by entry error would be corrected against the approved guide. New rules, changed destination fields or newly supplied sources would be recorded as controlled changes so earlier batches were not silently processed under later assumptions.
The work on Closed-Matter Document Index for Due Diligence gave our team a dependable handoff. Confirmed records were ready for operational use, while uncertain items came back with clear source references. Our reviewers could focus on the decisions that required internal ownership instead of rechecking the full dataset. The service has been well worth outsourcing to SDES and offers strong value for the cost.
