Media Handled Before the Production Deadline

What you can do together

• Transcribe and redact the media in a matter at volume, rather than assigning reviewers to work clip by clip against a fixed date.
• Keep matter identifiers on the media so processed output returns to the right matter.
• Run a first pass over transcripts that surfaces responsive material and flags privilege candidates for a lawyer to confirm.
• Agree the return path explicitly, so processed output actually reaches the matter rather than stopping at an export.

How it connects

Media and its metadata would move over Casepoint's API, with the matter identifiers travelling as attributes so the outcome returns to the right matter rather than to a folder. Audio and video would be transcribed and, where required, redacted in Redactor before review, which is the step that turns a fixed deadline from a staffing problem into a processing one.

The return path needs stating precisely rather than described as a round trip. The platform's documented export destinations are AWS storage and SharePoint, so processed output lands in a destination the organization controls; getting it from there into the Casepoint matter is integration work scoped against Casepoint's API. An engagement would agree that path explicitly, because the difference between "exported" and "back in the matter" is where a deadline is lost.

Casepoint would stay the ediscovery platform and the matter stays authoritative there. Legal holds, review workflow and productions are unchanged. A workflow on this side could run a first pass over transcripts to surface responsive passages and flag likely privilege, leaving the judgement to a lawyer.