🚨 AWS Outage Resolved: Critical Ethics Guidance for Lawyers Using Cloud-Based Legal Services

Legal professionals don’t react but act when your online legal systems are down!

Amazon Web Services experienced a major outage on October 20, 2025, disrupting legal practice management platforms like Clio, MyCase, PracticePanther, LEAP, and Lawcus. The Domain Name Service (DNS) resolution failure in AWS's US-EAST-1 region was fully mitigated by 6:35 AM EDT after approximately three hours. BUT THIS DOES NOT MEAN THEY HAVE RESOLVED ALL OF THE BACK ISSUES THAT ORIGINATED DUE TO THE OUTAGE at the time of this posting.  Note: DNS - the internet's phone book that translates human-readable web addresses into the numerical IP addresses that computers actually use. When DNS fails, it's like having all the street signs disappear at once. Your destination still exists, but there's no way to find it.

Try clearing your browser’s cache - that may help resolve some of the issues.

‼️ TIP! ‼️

Try clearing your browser’s cache - that may help resolve some of the issues. ‼️ TIP! ‼️

Legal professionals, what are your protocols when your online legal services are down?!

Lawyers using cloud-dependent legal services must review their ethical obligations under ABA Model Rules 1.1 and comment [8] (technological competence), 1.6 (confidentiality), and 5.3 (supervision of third-party vendors). Key steps include: documenting the incident's impact on client matters (if any), assessing whether material client information was compromised, notifying affected current clients if data breach occurred, reviewing business continuity plans, and conducting due diligence on cloud providers' disaster recovery protocols. Law firms should verify their vendors maintain redundant backup systems, SSAE16 audited data centers, and clear data ownership policies. The outage highlights the critical need for lawyers to understand their cloud infrastructure dependencies and maintain contingency plans for service disruptions.

🔒 Word (Phrase) of the Week: “Zero Data Retention” Agreements: Why Every Lawyer Must Pay Attention Now!

Understanding Zero Data Retention in Legal Practice

🚨 Lawyers Must Know Zero Data Retention Now!

Zero Data Retention (ZDR) agreements represent a fundamental shift in how law firms protect client confidentiality when using third-party technology services. These agreements ensure that sensitive client information is processed but never stored by vendors after immediate use. For attorneys navigating an increasingly digital practice environment, understanding ZDR agreements has become essential to maintaining ethical compliance.

ZDR works through a simple but powerful principle: access, process, and discard. When lawyers use services with ZDR agreements, the vendor connects to data only when needed, performs the requested task, and immediately discards all information without creating persistent copies. This architectural approach dramatically reduces the risk of data breaches and unauthorized access.

The Legal Ethics Crisis Hidden in Your Vendor Contracts

Recent court orders have exposed a critical vulnerability in how lawyers use technology. A federal court ordered OpenAI to preserve all ChatGPT conversation logs indefinitely, including deleted content—even for paying subscribers. This ruling affects millions of users and demonstrates how quickly data retention policies can change through litigation.

The implications for legal practice are severe. Attorneys using consumer-grade AI tools, standard cloud storage, or free collaboration platforms may unknowingly expose client confidences to indefinite retention. This creates potential violations of fundamental ethical obligations, regardless of the lawyer's intent or the vendor's original promises.

ABA Model Rules Create Mandatory Obligations

Three interconnected ABA Model Rules establish clear ethical requirements for lawyers using technology vendors.

Rule 1.1 and its Comment [8] requires technological competence. Attorneys must understand "the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology". This means lawyers cannot simply trust vendor marketing claims about data security. They must conduct meaningful due diligence before entrusting client information to any third party.

Rule 1.6 mandates confidentiality protection. Lawyers must "make reasonable efforts to prevent the inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure of, or unauthorized access to, information relating to the representation of a client". This obligation extends to all digital communications and cloud-based storage. When vendors retain data beyond the immediate need, attorneys face heightened risks of unauthorized disclosure.

Rule 5.3 governs supervision of nonlawyer assistants. This rule applies equally to technology vendors who handle client information. Lawyers with managerial authority must ensure their firms implement measures that provide reasonable assurance that vendors comply with the attorney's professional obligations.

Practical Steps for Ethical Compliance

Attorneys must implement specific practices to satisfy their ethical obligations when selecting technology vendors.

1. Demand written confirmation of zero data retention policies from all vendors handling client information. Ask whether the vendor uses client data for training AI models. Determine how long any data remains accessible after processing. These questions must be answered clearly before using any service.

Lawyers Need Zero Data Retention Agreements!

Review vendor agreements carefully. Standard terms of service often fail to provide adequate confidentiality protections. Attorneys should negotiate explicit contractual provisions that prohibit data retention beyond immediate processing needs. These agreements must specify encryption standards, access controls, and breach notification procedures.

Obtain client consent when using third-party services that may access confidential information. While not always legally required, informed consent demonstrates respect for client autonomy and provides an additional layer of protection.

Conduct ongoing monitoring of vendor practices. Initial due diligence is insufficient. Technology changes rapidly, and vendors may alter their data handling practices. Regular reviews ensure continued compliance with ethical obligations.

Restrict employee use of unauthorized tools. Many data breaches stem from "shadow IT"—employees using personal accounts or unapproved services for work purposes. Clear policies and training can prevent inadvertent ethical violations.

The Distinction Between Consumer and Enterprise Services

Not all AI and cloud services create equal ethical risks. Consumer versions of popular tools often lack the security features required for legal practice. Enterprise subscriptions typically provide enhanced protections, including zero data retention options.

For example, OpenAI offers different service tiers with dramatically different data handling practices. ChatGPT Free, Plus, Pro, and Team subscriptions now face indefinite data retention due to court orders. However, ChatGPT Enterprise and API customers with ZDR agreements remain unaffected. This distinction matters enormously for attorney compliance.

Industry-Specific Legal AI Offers Additional Safeguards

Legal-specific AI platforms build confidentiality protections into their core architecture. These tools understand attorney-client privilege requirements and design their systems accordingly. They typically offer encryption, access controls, SOC 2 compliance, and explicit commitments not to use client data for training.

When evaluating legal technology vendors, attorneys should prioritize those offering private AI environments, end-to-end encryption, and contractual guarantees about data retention. These features align with the ethical obligations imposed by the Model Rules.

Zero Data Retention as Competitive Advantage

Beyond ethical compliance, ZDR agreements offer practical benefits. They reduce storage costs, simplify regulatory compliance, and minimize the attack surface for cybersecurity threats. In an era of increasing data breaches, the ability to tell clients that their information is never stored by third parties provides meaningful competitive differentiation.

Final Thoughts: Action Required Now

Lawyers must Protect Client Data with ZDR!

The landscape of legal technology changes constantly. Court orders can suddenly transform data retention policies. Vendors can modify their terms of service. New ethical opinions can shift compliance expectations.

Attorneys cannot afford passive approaches to vendor management. They must actively investigate, negotiate, and monitor the data handling practices of every technology provider accessing client information. Zero data retention agreements represent one powerful tool for maintaining ethical compliance in an increasingly complex technological environment.

The duty of confidentiality remains absolute, regardless of the tools lawyers choose. By demanding ZDR agreements and implementing comprehensive vendor management practices, attorneys can embrace technological innovation while protecting the fundamental trust that defines the attorney-client relationship.

🎙️ Ep. 122: Cybersecurity Essentials for Law Firms: Proven Strategies from Navy Veteran & Attorney Cordell Robinson

My next guest is Cordell Brion Robinson, CEO of Brownstone Consulting Firm and a decorated US Navy veteran who brings an extraordinary combination of expertise to cybersecurity. With a background in Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, and law, plus experience as a Senior Intelligence Analyst, Cordell has created cybersecurity programs that comply with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Federal Information Security Management Act, and the Office of Management and Budget standards for both government and commercial organizations. His firm specializes in compliance services, performing security framework assessments globally for commercial and government entities. Currently, he's innovating the cybersecurity space through automation for security assessments. Beyond his professional accomplishments, Cordell runs the Shaping Futures Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to empowering youth through education, demonstrating his commitment to giving back to the community.

Join Cordell Robinson and me as we discuss the following three questions and more! 🎙️

1. What are the top three cybersecurity practices that lawyers should immediately adopt to secure both client data and sensitive case material in their practice?

2. From your perspective as both a legal and cybersecurity expert, what are the top three technology tools or platforms that can help lawyers streamline compliance and governance requirements in a rapidly evolving regulatory environment?

3. What are the top three steps lawyers can take to overcome resistance to technology adoption in law firms, ensuring these tools actually improve outcomes and efficiency rather than just adding complexity

In our conversation, we cover the following: ⏱️

- 00:00:00 - Introduction and welcome to the podcast

- 00:00:30 - Cordell's current tech setup - Windows laptop, MacBook, and iPhone

- 00:01:00 - iPhone 17 Pro Max features including 48MP camera, 2TB storage, and advanced video capture

- 00:01:30 - iPhone 17 Air comparison and laptop webcam discussion

- 00:02:00 - VPN usage strategies - Government VPN for secure client communications

- 00:02:30 - Commercial client communications and secure file sharing practices

- 00:03:00 - Why email encryption matters and Mac Mail setup tutorial

- 00:04:00 - Bonus question: Key differences between commercial and government security work

- 00:05:00 - Security protocols comparison and navigating government red tape

- 00:06:00 - Question 1: Top three cybersecurity practices lawyers must implement immediately

- 00:06:30 - Understanding where client data comes from and having proper IT security professionals

- 00:07:00 - Implementing cybersecurity awareness training for all staff members

- 00:07:30 - Practical advice for solo and small practitioners without dedicated IT staff

- 00:08:00 - Proper email practices and essential security awareness training skills

- 00:08:30 - Handling data from average clients in sensitive cases like family law

- 00:09:00 - Social engineering considerations in contentious legal matters such as divorces

- 00:10:00 - Screening threats from seemingly reliable platforms - Google Play slop ads as recent example

- 00:10:30 - Tenable vulnerability scanning tool recommendation (approximately $1,500/year)

- 00:11:00 - Question 2: Technology tools for streamlining compliance and governance

- 00:11:30 - GRC tools for organizing compliance documentation across various price points

- 00:12:00 - SharePoint security lockdown and importance of proper system configuration

- 00:12:30 - Monitoring tools discussion - why no perfect solution exists and what to consider

- 00:13:00 - Being amenable to change and avoiding long-term contracts with security tools

- 00:14:00 - Question 3: Strategies for overcoming resistance to technology adoption

- 00:14:30 - Demonstrating efficiency and explaining the full implementation process

- 00:15:00 - Converting time savings to dollars and cents for senior attorney buy-in

- 00:15:30 - Mindset shift for billable hour attorneys and staying competitive in the market

- 00:16:00 - Being a technology Guinea pig and testing tools yourself first

- 00:16:30 - Showing real results to encourage buy-in from colleagues

- 00:17:00 - Real-world Microsoft Word example - styles, cross-references, and table of contents time savings

- 00:17:30 - Showing value add and how technology can bring in more revenue

- 00:18:00 - Where to find Cordell Robinson - LinkedIn, www.bcf-us.com, Brownstone Consulting Firm

- 00:18:30 - Company description and closing remarks

Resources 📚

Connect with Cordell Robinson:

• LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/cordell-robinson-a2213a4

• Company Website: https://www.bcf-us.com

• Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/brownstone_consulting_firm

• Shaping Futures Foundation: https://shapingfutures.org 

Government & Compliance Frameworks:

• NIST: https://www.nist.gov

• NIST Time Services: https://nist.time.gov

Software & Tools:

• Apple Mail Encryption Guide: https://support.apple.com/guide/mail/sign-or-encrypt-emails-mlhlp1180/mac

• Apple Products: https://www.apple.com

• Microsoft SharePoint: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/sharepoint/collaboration

• Microsoft Word: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/word

• Tenable Vulnerability Management: https://www.tenable.com

MTC: Balancing Digital Transparency and Government Employee Safety: The Legal Profession's Ethical Crossroads in the Age of ICE Tracking Apps

The balance between government employee saftey and the public’s right to know is always in flux.

The intersection of technology, government transparency, and employee safety has created an unprecedented ethical challenge for the legal profession. Recent developments surrounding ICE tracking applications like ICEBlock, People Over Papers, and similar platforms have thrust lawyers into a complex moral and professional landscape where the traditional principle of "sunlight as the best disinfectant" collides with legitimate security concerns for government employees.

The Technology Landscape: A New Era of Crowdsourced Monitoring

The proliferation of ICE tracking applications represents a significant shift in how citizens monitor government activities. ICEBlock, developed by Joshua Aaron, allows users to anonymously report ICE agent sightings within a five-mile radius, functioning essentially as "Waze for immigration enforcement". People Over Papers, created by TikTok user Celeste, operates as a web-based platform using Padlet technology to crowdsource and verify ICE activity reports with photographs and timestamps. Additional platforms include Islip Forward, which provides real-time push notifications for Suffolk County residents, and Coquí, offering mapping and alert systems for ICE activities.

These applications exist within a broader ecosystem of similar technologies. Traditional platforms like Waze, Google Maps, and Apple Maps have long enabled police speed trap reporting. More controversial surveillance tools include Fog Reveal, which allows law enforcement to track civilian movements using advertising IDs from popular apps. The distinction between citizen-initiated transparency tools and government surveillance technologies highlights the complex ethical terrain lawyers must navigate.

The Ethical Framework: ABA Guidelines and Professional Responsibilities

Legal professionals face multiple competing ethical obligations when addressing these technological developments. ABA Model Rule 1.1 requires lawyers to maintain technological competence, understanding both the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology. This competence requirement extends beyond mere familiarity to encompass the ethical implications of technology use in legal practice.

Rule 1.6's confidentiality obligations create additional complexity when lawyers handle cases involving government employees, ICE agents, or immigration-related matters. The duty to protect client information becomes particularly challenging when technology platforms may compromise attorney-client privilege or expose sensitive personally identifiable information to third parties.

The tension between advocacy responsibilities and ethical obligations becomes acute when lawyers represent clients on different sides of immigration enforcement. Attorneys representing undocumented immigrants may view transparency tools as legitimate safety measures, while those representing government employees may consider the same applications as security threats that endanger their clients.

Balancing Transparency and Safety: The Core Dilemma

Who watches whom? Exploring transparency limits in democracy.

The principle of transparency in government operations serves as a cornerstone of democratic accountability. However, the safety of government employees, including ICE agents, presents legitimate counterbalancing concerns. Federal officials have reported significant increases in assaults against ICE agents, citing these tracking applications as contributing factors.

The challenge for legal professionals lies in advocating for their clients while maintaining ethical standards that protect all parties' legitimate interests. This requires nuanced understanding of both technology capabilities and legal boundaries. Lawyers must recognize that the same transparency tools that may protect their immigrant clients could potentially endanger government employees who are simply performing their lawful duties.

Technology Ethics in Legal Practice: Professional Standards

The legal profession's approach to technology ethics must evolve to address these emerging challenges. Lawyers working with sensitive immigration cases must implement robust cybersecurity measures, understand the privacy implications of various communication platforms, and maintain clear boundaries between personal advocacy and professional obligations.

The ABA's guidance on generative AI and technology use provides relevant frameworks for addressing these issues. Legal professionals must ensure that their technology choices do not inadvertently compromise client confidentiality or create security vulnerabilities that could harm any party to legal proceedings.

Jurisdictional and Regulatory Considerations

The removal of ICEBlock from Apple's App Store and People Over Papers from Padlet demonstrates how private platforms exercise content moderation that can significantly impact government transparency tools. These actions raise important questions about the role of technology companies in mediating between transparency advocates and security concerns.

Legal professionals must understand the complex regulatory environment governing these technologies. Federal agencies like CISA recommend encrypted communications for high-value government targets while acknowledging the importance of government transparency. This creates a nuanced landscape where legitimate security measures must coexist with accountability mechanisms.

Professional Recommendations and Best Practices

Legal practitioners working in this environment should adopt several key practices. First, maintain clear separation between personal political views and professional obligations. Second, implement comprehensive cybersecurity measures that protect all client information regardless of their position in legal proceedings proceedings. Third, stay informed about technological developments and their legal implications through continuing education focused on technology law and ethics.

Lawyers should also engage in transparent communication with clients about the risks and benefits of various technology platforms. This includes obtaining informed consent when using technologies that may impact privacy or security, and maintaining awareness of how different platforms handle data security and user privacy.

The legal profession must also advocate for balanced regulatory approaches that protect both government transparency and employee safety. This may involve supporting legislation that creates appropriate oversight mechanisms while maintaining necessary security protections for government workers.

The Path Forward: Ethical Technology Advocacy

The future of legal practice will require increasingly sophisticated approaches to balancing competing interests in our digital age. Legal professionals must serve as informed advocates who understand both the technological landscape and the ethical obligations that govern their profession. This includes recognizing that technology platforms designed for legitimate transparency purposes can be misused, while also acknowledging that government accountability remains essential to democratic governance.

transparency is a balancing act that all lawyers need to be aware of in their practice!

The legal profession's response to ICE tracking applications and similar technologies will establish important precedents for how lawyers navigate future ethical challenges in our increasingly connected world. By maintaining focus on professional ethical standards while advocating effectively for their clients, legal professionals can help ensure that technological advances serve justice rather than undermining it.

Success in this environment requires lawyers to become technologically literate advocates who understand both the promise and perils of digital transparency tools. Only through this balanced approach can the legal profession effectively serve its clients while maintaining the ethical standards that define professional practice in the digital age.

MTC

MTC (Bonus): The Critical Importance of Source Verification When Using AI in Legal Practice 📚⚖️

The Fact-Checking Lawyer vs. AI Errors!

Legal professionals face an escalating verification crisis as AI tools proliferate throughout the profession. A recent conversation I had with an AI research assistant about AOL's dial-up internet shutdown perfectly illustrates why lawyers must rigorously fact-check AI outputs. In preparing my editorial for earlier today (see here), I came across a glaring error.  And when I corrected the AI's repeated date errors—it incorrectly cited 2024 instead of 2025 for AOL's September 30 shutdown—this highlighted the dangerous gap between AI confidence and AI accuracy that has resulted in over 410 documented AI hallucination cases worldwide. (You can also see my previous discussions on the topic here).

This verification imperative extends beyond simple date corrections. Stanford University research reveals troubling accuracy rates across legal AI tools, with some systems producing incorrect information over 34% of the time, while even the best-performing specialized legal AI platforms still generate false information approximately 17% of the time. These statistics underscore a fundamental truth: AI tools are powerful research assistants, not infallible oracles.

AI Hallucinations in the Courtroom are not a good thing!

Editor's Note: The irony was not lost on me that while writing this editorial about AI accuracy problems, I had to correct the AI assistant multiple times for contradictory statements about error rates in this very paragraph. The AI initially claimed Westlaw had 34% errors while specialized legal platforms had only 17% errors—ignoring that Westlaw IS a specialized legal platform. This real-time experience of catching AI logical inconsistencies while drafting an article about AI verification perfectly demonstrates the critical need for human oversight that this editorial advocates.

The consequences of inadequate verification are severe and mounting. Courts have imposed sanctions ranging from $2,500 to $30,000 on attorneys who submitted AI-generated fake cases. Recent cases include Morgan & Morgan lawyers sanctioned $5,000 for citing eight nonexistent cases, and a California attorney fined $10,000 for submitting briefs where "nearly all legal quotations ... [were] fabricated". These sanctions reflect judicial frustration with attorneys who fail to fulfill their gatekeeping responsibilities.

Legal professionals face implicit ethical obligations that demand rigorous source verification when using AI tools. ABA Model Rule 1.1 (Competence) requires attorneys to understand "the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology," including AI's propensity for hallucinations. Rule 3.4 (Fairness to Opposing Party and Tribunal) prohibits knowingly making false statements of fact or law to courts. Rule 5.1 (Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistance) extends supervisory duties to AI tools, requiring lawyers to ensure AI work product meets professional standards. Courts consistently emphasize that "existing rules impose a gatekeeping role on attorneys to ensure the accuracy of their filings".

The Tech-Savvy Lawyer should have AI Verification Protocols.

The legal profession must establish verification protocols that treat AI as sophisticated but fallible technology requiring human oversight (perhaps a comment to Rule 1.1(8). This includes cross-referencing AI citations against authoritative databases, validating factual claims through independent sources, and maintaining detailed records of verification processes. Resources like The Tech-Savvy Lawyer blog and podcast provide valuable guidance for implementing these best practices. As one federal judge warned, "the duty to check their sources and make a reasonable inquiry into existing law remains unchanged" in the age of AI.

Attorneys who embrace AI without implementing robust verification systems risk professional sanctions, client harm, and reputational damage that could have been prevented through diligent fact-checking practices.  Simply put - check your work when using AI.

MTC

MTC: The End of Dial-Up Internet: A Digital Divide Crisis for Legal Practice 📡⚖️

Dial-up shutdown deepens rural legal digital divide.

The legal profession faces an unprecedented access to justice challenge as AOL officially terminated its dial-up internet service on September 30, 2025, after 34 years of operation. This closure affects approximately 163,401 American households that depended solely on dial-up connections as of 2023, creating barriers to legal services in an increasingly digital world. While other dial-up providers like NetZero, Juno, and DSLExtreme continue operating, they may not cover all geographic areas previously served by AOL and offer limited long-term viability.

While many view dial-up as obsolete, its elimination exposes critical technology gaps that disproportionately impact vulnerable populations requiring legal assistance. Rural residents, low-income individuals, and elderly clients who relied on this affordable connectivity option now face digital exclusion from essential legal services and court systems. The remaining dial-up options provide minimal relief as these smaller providers lack AOL's extensive infrastructure coverage.

Split Courtroom!

Legal professionals must recognize that technology barriers create access to justice issues. When clients cannot afford high-speed internet or live in areas without broadband infrastructure, they lose the ability to participate in virtual court proceedings, access online legal resources, or communicate effectively with their attorneys. This digital divide effectively creates a two-tiered justice system where technological capacity determines legal access.

The legal community faces an implicit ethical duty to address these technology barriers. While no specific ABA Model Rule mandates accommodating clients' internet limitations, the professional responsibility to ensure access to justice flows from fundamental ethical obligations.

This implicit duty derives from several ABA Model Rules that create relevant obligations. Rule 1.1 (Competence) requires attorneys to understand "the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology," including how technology barriers affect client representation. Rule 1.4 (Communication) mandates effective client communication, which encompasses understanding technology limitations that prevent meaningful attorney-client interaction. Rule 1.6 (Confidentiality) requires reasonable efforts to protect client information, necessitating awareness of technology security implications. Additionally, 41 jurisdictions have adopted technology competence requirements that obligate lawyers to stay current with technological developments affecting legal practice.

Lawyers are a leader when it comes to calls for action to help narrow the access to justice devide!

The legal community must advocate for affordable internet solutions and develop technology-inclusive practices to fulfill these professional responsibilities and ensure equal access to justice for all clients.

MTC

🎙️ Ep. 121: Iowa Personal Injury Lawyer Tim Semelroth on AI Expert Testimony Prep, Claude for Legal Research and Client Communications Tech!

My next guest is Tim Semelroth. Tim is an Iowa personal injury attorney from RSH Legal, who leverages cutting-edge AI tools, including Notebook LM for expert testimony preparation, Claude AI for dictation, and SIO for medical records analysis. He shares practical strategies for maintaining client relationships through e-signatures, texting integration, and automated birthday card systems while embracing legal technology. All this and more, enjoy.

Join Tim Semelroth and me as we discuss the following three questions and more!

1. What are the top three ways lawyers can leverage AI tools like ChatGPT and Notebook LM to prepare for expert testimony or cross-examination? And how do you ensure client confidentiality when using these tools?

2. What are the top three technology tools or systems that personal injury attorneys should implement to streamline their practice when handling cases involving trucking accidents, medical records analysis, and insurance negotiations?

3. What are the top three strategies you recommend for attorneys to maintain personal relationships with clients and community involvement, while also embracing cutting-edge legal technology to improve practice efficiency?

In our conversation, we cover the following:

[00:01:00] Introduction and guest tech setup discussion

[00:02:00] Dell hardware specifications and IT outsourcing strategy

[00:03:00] Smartphone preferences - iPhone 16 and iPad Pro

[00:04:00] Cross-platform compatibility between Windows and Mac environments

[00:05:00] Web-based software solutions for remote work flexibility

[00:06:00] Plaud AI dictation hardware - features and use cases

[00:07:00] Dictation while exercising and driving - mobile workflows

[00:08:00] Essential software stack - File Vine, Lead Docket, and SIO

[00:09:00] AI tools for expert testimony preparation and HIPAA compliance

[00:10:00] Simplifying complex legal language for jury comprehension

[00:11:00] Using AI to brainstorm cross-examination topics and preparation

[00:12:00] Notebook LM audio overview feature for testimony preparation

[00:13:00] Client communication preferences - e-signatures and texting

[00:14:00] File Vine texting integration for client communications

[00:15:00] Case management alerts and notification systems

[00:17:00] Client preferences for phone vs. video communication

[00:18:00] Rural client challenges and electronic communication benefits

[00:20:00] SIO AI platform for medical records analysis

[00:21:00] Medical chronology automation and document management

[00:22:00] Jurisdiction-specific customization for demand letters

[00:23:00] Content repurposing strategy across multiple platforms

[00:24:00] LinkedIn marketing for lawyer referral relationships

[00:25:00] Multi-channel newsletter approach - digital and print

[00:26:00] Print newsletter effectiveness for legal professionals

[00:27:00] SEO benefits and peer recognition from content marketing

[00:28:00] Client communication policy - 30-day contact requirements

[00:29:00] Proactive client outreach through text messaging

[00:30:00] Automated birthday card system for client retention

[00:31:00] The Marv Stallman Rule - personal marketing through cards

[00:32:00] Technology-enabled client relationship management

[00:33:00] Contact information and social media presence

RESOURCES

Connect with Tim!

• LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tim-semelroth/

• Firm Website: https://www.fightingforfairness.com

Hardware mentioned in the conversation

• Dell Precision 5490 laptop: https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/precision-5490-mobile-workstation/spd/precision-14-5490-laptop

• Dell SC2722HX dual monitors (4K): https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-27-4k-uhd-usb-c-hub-monitor-s2722dz/apd/210-ayue

• Dell UltraSharp 4K UHD Webcam: https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-ultrasharp-4k-webcam-wb7022/apd/520-aaul

• iPad Pro: https://www.apple.com/ipad-pro/

• iPhone 16: https://www.apple.com/iphone-16/

• Mac (family computer): https://www.apple.com/mac/

• Plaud AI Note recorder: https://www.plaud.ai/products/plaud-note-ai-voice-recorder

• Plaud AI Pin: https://www.plaud.ai/collections/collection-for-all-device

Software & Cloud Services mentioned in the conversation

• Audible: https://www.audible.com/

• ChatGPT: https://chat.openai.com/

• Claude AI: https://claude.ai/

• File Vine (Case Management): https://www.filevine.com/

• Lead Docket (Lead Management): https://www.leaddocket.com/

• Microsoft Outlook Add-In (File Vine): https://www.filevine.com/integrations/

• Notebook LM (Google): https://notebooklm.google.com/

• SIO (AI Medical Records Analysis): https://www.supio.com/ 

Subscribe to The Tech-Savvy Lawyer.Page podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Don't forget to leave us a five-star review! ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️

🚨 Breaking News! Federal Courts Implement Enhanced Security Measures for Sealed Documents Following Sophisticated Nation-State Cyberattacks! What Lawyers Must Know Now!!!

Federal courts have launched sweeping new protocols restricting electronic access to sealed documents after a widespread cyberattack linked to Russian actors exposed critical vulnerabilities in the federal judiciary’s decades-old digital infrastructure. As previously reported here, the breach compromised highly confidential information—such as sealed indictments and informant data—across numerous districts, prompting courts to eliminate electronic viewing of sealed filings and require paper-only procedures for sensitive court documents.

what do lawyers need to do as Federal courts respond to cyber attacks?

Why is this happening?
Nation-state cyber threats and outdated systems left federal courts open to attack, as repeatedly warned by The Tech-Savvy Lawyer.Page. The blog has consistently flagged the risks associated with aging technology, weak authentication, and the need for law firms to adopt advanced cybersecurity practices. The recent breach brings these warnings to life, forcing immediate changes for all legal professionals.

What lawyers must do:
Attorneys must now file sealed documents according to new court protocols—usually paper filings—and cannot access them electronically. This transformation demands lawyers take proactive steps to secure confidential information at all times, in line with ABA Model Rule 1.6. Practitioners should review The Tech-Savvy Lawyer.Page for practical tips on ethical compliance and digital preparedness, such as those featured in its “go bag” guide for legal professionals.

Most importantly, consult your local federal court’s website or clerk for the latest procedures, as requirements may vary by district. Safeguarding client confidentiality remains central to legal ethics—stay vigilant, stay informed, and stay tech-savvy.

MTC: Federal Circuit's Drop Box Relocation Sends a Signal Threatening Access to Justice: Why Paper Filing Options Must Remain Accessible 📝⚖️

Midnight Filing Rights Under Threat by Federal Court Drop Box Move.

The Federal Circuit's recent decision to relocate its paper filing drop box from outside the courthouse to inside the building, with restricted hours of 8:30 AM to 7:00 PM, represents a concerning step backward for legal accessibility. This policy change, effective October 20, 2025, fundamentally undermines decades of established legal practice and creates unnecessary barriers to justice that disproportionately impact solo practitioners, small firms, and self-represented litigants.

The Critical Role of 24/7 Drop Box Access 🕐

For generations, the legal profession has relied on midnight filing capabilities as an essential safety net. The traditional 24-hour drop box access has served as a crucial backup system when electronic filing systems fail, internet connectivity issues arise, or attorneys face last-minute technical emergencies. Federal courts have long recognized that electronic filing deadlines extend until midnight in the court's time zone, acknowledging that legal work often continues around the clock and in different time zones across the globe.

The ability to file papers at any hour has been particularly vital for attorneys handling time-sensitive matters such as emergency motions, appeals with strict deadlines, and patent applications where timing can be critical to a client's rights. Research shows that approximately 10% of federal court filings occur after 5:00 PM, with many of these representing urgent legal matters that cannot wait until the next business day.

Technology's Promise and Perils ⚙️

While electronic filing systems have revolutionized legal practice, they are far from infallible. Court system outages occur with concerning regularity - as recently demonstrated by Washington State's two-week court system shutdown due to unauthorized network activity. When CM/ECF systems go offline, attorneys must have reliable alternative filing methods to meet critical deadlines.

The Federal Circuit's own procedures acknowledge this reality, noting that their CM/ECF system undergoes scheduled maintenance and may experience unexpected outages. During these periods, having accessible backup filing options becomes essential for maintaining the integrity of the legal process. The relocation of the drop box inside the building with limited hours eliminates this crucial failsafe, potentially leaving attorneys with no viable filing option during system emergencies outside business hours.

Digital Divide and Access to Justice Concerns 📱

Tech-Savvy Lawyer Battles Drop Box Access and Justice Barrier.

The restricted drop box access exacerbates existing digital equity issues within the legal system. While large law firms have robust IT infrastructure and technical support, solo practitioners and small firms often lack these resources. Self-represented litigants, who represent approximately 75-95% of parties in many civil cases, face even greater challenges navigating electronic filing requirements.

Studies have shown that technology adoption in courts has disproportionately benefited well-resourced parties while creating additional barriers for vulnerable populations. The Federal Circuit's policy change continues this troubling trend by prioritizing operational convenience over equal access to justice.

Legal Practice Realities 💼

The Federal Circuit's restricted hours—8:30 AM to 7:00 PM, Monday through Friday—fail to recognize the realities of modern legal practice. Patent attorneys, who frequently practice before this court, often work across multiple time zones and may need to file documents outside traditional business hours due to client demands or international coordination requirements.

Moreover, the new policy requires documents to be date-stamped and security-screened before deposit, adding additional procedural steps that could create delays and complications. These requirements, while perhaps well-intentioned from a security perspective, create practical obstacles that could prevent the timely filing of critical documents.

Recommendations for Balanced Approach ✅

The Federal Circuit should reconsider this policy change and adopt a more balanced approach that strikes a balance between security and access to justice. Recommended alternatives include:

Hybrid access model: Maintain extended drop box hours (perhaps 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM) to accommodate working attorneys while addressing security concerns.

Emergency filing provisions: Establish clear procedures for after-hours emergency filings when deadlines cannot be met due to the restricted schedule.

Enhanced electronic backup systems: Invest in more robust CM/ECF infrastructure and backup systems to reduce the likelihood of system outages that would necessitate paper filing.

Stakeholder consultation: Engage with the patent bar and other frequent court users to develop solutions that balance operational needs with practitioner requirements.

Preserving the Foundation of Legal Practice ⚖️

Drop Box Limits Highlight Digital Divide in Federal Courthouse Access.

The Federal Circuit's drop box policy change represents more than an administrative adjustment - it undermines a fundamental principle that the courthouse doors should remain open to all who seek justice. The legal profession has long operated on the understanding that filing deadlines are absolute, and courts have historically provided mechanisms to ensure compliance even under challenging circumstances.

By restricting drop box access, the Federal Circuit sends a troubling message that convenience trumps accessibility. This policy particularly harms the very practitioners who help maintain the patent system's vitality - innovative small businesses, independent inventors, and emerging technology companies that rely on accessible filing procedures.

The court should reverse this decision and either restore 24-hour drop box access or, at a minimum, extend the hours to serve the legal community and the public better. In an era where access to justice faces mounting challenges, courts must resist policies that create additional barriers to legal participation. The integrity of our judicial system depends on maintaining pathways for all parties to present their cases, regardless of their technological capabilities or the timing of their legal needs.

MTC

How Legal Professionals Type Faster with These Three Cross-Platform Mobile Keyboards

Is a third-party keyboard the right keyboard to improve your work?

Legal professionals spend considerable time documenting case details, communicating with clients, and drafting essential legal documents on mobile devices. The choice of keyboard app significantly impacts typing efficiency and overall productivity. Research indicates that attorneys spend upwards of two hours daily typing, making keyboard selection crucial for mobile workflow optimization. The internet finds these three exceptional third-party keyboards work seamlessly across iOS, Pixel OS, and Android platforms, empowering lawyers to type faster while maintaining professional accuracy.

Microsoft SwiftKey: The Intelligent Learning Keyboard ⚖️

Microsoft SwiftKey stands as the premier choice for legal professionals seeking predictive intelligence combined with cross-platform reliability. This AI-powered keyboard learns individual typing patterns, legal terminology, and frequently used phrases, dramatically reducing the time spent on repetitive documentation tasks.

The keyboard excels in flow typing (swipe-to-text functionality), allowing lawyers to compose longer legal phrases with single gestures. SwiftKey's autocorrect algorithm demonstrates exceptional accuracy with legal jargon and technical terminology. The keyboard maintains a comprehensive dictionary that adapts to professional vocabulary, making it particularly valuable for attorneys who regularly use specialized legal terms.

SwiftKey offers clipboard synchronization between mobile devices and computers, enabling seamless workflow transitions between courtroom notes and office documentation. The keyboard supports over 700 languages with excellent bilingual capabilities, beneficial for practitioners serving diverse client populations. Customization options include adjustable keyboard height, multiple themes, and programmable text shortcuts.

Google Gboard: The Speed-Focused Professional Tool 📱

third-party keyboards can make mobile text entry faster and more efficient!

Google Gboard provides exceptional raw typing speed with minimal learning curve, making it ideal for attorneys requiring immediate productivity gains. The keyboard integrates Google's advanced machine learning for context-aware predictions and grammar suggestions.

Gboard's voice typing functionality offers superior accuracy compared to competitors, enabling hands-free document creation during client meetings or while reviewing case materials. The built-in Google Search feature allows lawyers to quickly verify facts, find legal precedents, or access relevant information without switching applications. This functionality proves invaluable during depositions or client consultations requiring immediate reference materials.

The keyboard includes Emoji Kitchen and comprehensive GIF search capabilities, useful for modern client communication preferences while maintaining professional boundaries. Gboard supports gesture typing with excellent accuracy and provides customizable themes with dynamic adjustments based on device settings.

CleverType: The Professional Communication Specialist 💼

CleverType emerges as the specialized solution for legal professionals prioritizing professional communication standards. This AI keyboard focuses specifically on business and professional writing, offering customizable tone settings that automatically adjust language formality based on the recipient and context.

CleverType's contextual awareness distinguishes between various communication types, suggesting more formal language in email correspondence and appropriate casual tones for internal messaging. The keyboard includes grammar and tone correction features that help prevent miscommunications common in legal practice. Professional users report time savings of up to 30% through reduced revision requirements.

The keyboard offers industry-specific terminology integration and learns specialized vocabularies relevant to different legal practice areas. Security features include end-to-end encryption and local processing options, addressing confidentiality concerns paramount in legal practice. CleverType integrates seamlessly with popular legal software and case management systems.

Implementation Considerations for Legal Practice

What do lawyers need to consider when implementing a third-party keyboard?

When implementing third-party keyboards in legal environments, practitioners should consider security protocols and client confidentiality requirements. All three keyboards offer privacy settings, but CleverType provides the most comprehensive security features for sensitive legal communications.

Training requirements vary among options, with Gboard requiring minimal adjustment time, SwiftKey needing several days to optimize learning, and CleverType becoming most valuable after understanding professional features. Legal professionals should evaluate their specific needs regarding multilingual support, integration requirements, and security protocols when making selection decisions.

Final Thoughts

These keyboard solutions represent significant productivity enhancements for mobile-focused legal practice, with each offering distinct advantages for different professional requirements and communication styles. Which one is best for you or do you use a different keyboard? Please share in the comments section below!