OASIS LegalXML Electronic Court Filing Technical Committee

1. www.oasis-open.org OASIS LegalXML Electronic Court Filing Technical Committee October 3, 2011 Long Beach Convention Center Court Technology Conference 2011

2. Agenda • ECF TC Morning Meeting • Welcome and Introductions • CTC 2011 events • LegalXML updates • New use cases (e-SOP and e-discovery) • Feedback from ECF implementers (open to public) • ECF TC Afternoon Meeting • NIEM updates • Future planning • TC conference call

3. ECF TC Roster

4. CTC 2011 Events • “E-filing and Web Services” • Tuesday, 4PM • “Paper-on-demand / E-filing Solution Sharing Session” • Wednesday, 7AM

5. LegalXML UpdatesECF Specification Approval • ECF 4.01 Core, Web Services SIP and Portable Media SIP specifications • 1. 15 day Public Review (current state of all specs) • 2. Committee Specification • 3. Three statements of support from implementers • 4. 60 day Public Review and OASIS Ballot • 6. OASIS Standard • 7. Errata • Goal: ECF 4.01 Core Specification to OASIS Standard ASAP • ECF 4.01 SIPs will likely stop at Committee Specification until more implementations exist

6. LegalXML UpdatesMember Section • Only 1 active TC (ECF) • 2 new TC proposed (LegalRuleML, ParliamentXML) • Merger with e-gov Member Section? • Discusses governmental/public administration requirements for e-business standardization. • Directs and understands the impact of open standards on the public sector. • Includes representatives from global, regional, national and local government agencies • 1 active e-gov TC: Transformational Government TC • Advancing an overall framework for using IT to improve the delivery of public services

7. LegalXML UpdatesNew LegalRuleML TC • Manifesto • Letters of endorsement • Relationship to prior LegalXML work? • ECF • e-Contracts • e-Notary • Recruiting participation in new TC

8. LegalXML UpdatesSteering Committee • Members • Jim Cabral (chair, elected at large) • Robert O’Brien (ECF representative) • Monica Palmirani (elected at large) • Budget • 2011: $27k ($23k available) • 2012: Depends on funding plan • Agenda for 10/3/11 meeting • Budget and TC status reports • Funding requests and proposals for new TCs • Planning new TCs, 2012 budget and the long-term viability of the Member Section

9. Electronic Service of Process (e-SOP) ECF 4.x supports secondary service E-Service Mechanisms E-Mail Social Media New Legislation and Rules Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

10. e-SOPE-Mail Increasingly used as substitute “service of process” on an exceptional basis. Law enforcement e-subpoenas. Collier County, FL. Louisville, KY. Federal courts. Multiple cases of Chinese manufacturers being served by e-mail. International. Who Is Subcommittee of the Internet Committee of the International Trademark Association. Recommending e-SOP on a company via e-mail to the registered owner of the company’s Internet domain. Supreme Court of India. Authorized e-SOP by e-mail.

11. e-SOPSocial Media Service of process via Twitter. Netherlands. England. Service of process via Facebook. Australia – multiple cases. New Zealand. Canada.

12. e-SOPNew Legislation and Rules Foreign Manufacturers Legal Accountability Act of 2010 Requires manufacturers to have an “agent” located in at least one state where the company does business that would accept service of process for any civil and regulatory claims. Rules for Debt Collection Failures and abuses in debt collection process serving are driving new legislation and rules

13. e-SOPFederal Rules of Civil Procedure Widespread e-SOP within the U.S. would likely require an amendment to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 4(f)(3) allows for service outside the U.S. and for actions pending in the federal courts. Draft of The Federal Courts Law Review article, written by Ronald J. Hedges, Kenneth N. Rashbaum, and Adam C. Losey. “Even if all the arguments against electronic service of process hold true, when electronic service of process is used as a secondary or tertiary channel of service it is more secure and more reliable than the channels currently used. Federal courts already allow service via means that are less reliable than normal channels, provided that more reliable channels are first exhausted.” “Technology has evolved to the point that electronic service is superior to many forms of traditional service. Electronic service should now be treated as an equal to paper media by the Federal Rules.”

14. Electronic Discovery EDRM XML schema available at edrm.net

15. Feedback from Implementers Courts Solution Providers Intresys Green Filing Tybera URL Integration • Los Angeles County • New use case: Non-court-filings • Arizona • Utah • US Federal Courts • US Bankruptcy Courts / BAE

16. NIEM Updates • National Training Event • XML Structures Task Force (XSTF) • Logical Entity eXchange Specification (LEXS) • New approach to packaging NIEM messages for improved interoperability • 3.1 – Publication & Discovery, Search & Retrieval • 4.0 rc– adds Subscribe & Notify and Domain Exchange • NIEM 2.1 • Minor changes and additions • Children, Youth and Family Services (CYFS) domain • Some overlap with ECF Juvenile case extensions

17. NIEM UpdatesNIEM 3.0 • Tentative Publication Date: 2013 • New for NIEM 3.0 • New self-service tools available • Version Architecture • Harmonization of 2.1, new content, and domain updates

18. NIEM UpdatesNIEM 3.0

19. Future ECF Core Specifications New Functionality Architecture Updates NIEM 2.1 Reconcile w/ CYFS domain? NIEM 3.0? LEXS 3.1 / 4.0? • Electronic Service of Process? • E-Discovery? • Federal Courts? • Non-court filings? • Others?

20. AZ TurboCourt Integration October 03, 2011

21. Messaging Profile ECF specification defines 2 SIP:- Web Service SIP;- Portable Media SIP AZ MDEs use MQ based transportation Need to have AZ TurboCourt Messaging Profile An MDE may need to support multiple profiles, e.g.: WebService and Messaging.

22. Messaging Profile

23. TurboCourt-Message Exchange DefinitionsXML Schema Wrapped style: <xsd:complexType name="GetDocumentRequestType"> <xsd:complexContent> <xsd:extension base="s:ComplexObjectType"> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element ref="docquery:DocumentQueryMessage"/> </xsd:sequence> </xsd:extension> </xsd:complexContent> </xsd:complexType>

24. TurboCourt-Message Exchange DefinitionsXML Schema Imports TurboCourt schema extension: <xsd:import namespace="http://turbocourt.com/ecf/extension/1.0" schemaLocation="./extension/TurboCourt-Extension.xsd"/> The extension redefines some elements; introduces new ones; is fairly small

25. TurboCourt Schema ExtensionExample <xsd:complexType name="ReviewedDocumentType"> <xsd:complexContent> <xsd:extension base="ecf:ReviewedDocumentType"> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:element ref="DocumentTitleText" minOccurs="0"/> <xsd:element ref="DocumentCategoryID" minOccurs="0"/> <xsd:element ref="DocumentCategoryName" minOccurs="0"/> <xsd:element ref="ActivityRequest" minOccurs="0"/> </xsd:sequence> <xsd:attribute ref="s:ref"/> </xsd:extension> </xsd:complexContent> </xsd:complexType>

26. Debates: Create IEPD? Option 1: Don’t create IEPD, use the one from the specification. Option 2: Create one by removing unneeded elements, adding (from NIEM) the missing ones

27. Debates: Message Receipt Message needs to be asynchronous? Large filings tie up resources with synchronous MRM for a considerable period of time. Multiple MRMs should be possible to make async updates.

28. Debates: Make your element or use provided? A frequent use case of an element having multiple identifications: <an-element> <nc:IdentificationID>1000</nc:IdentificationID> <nc:IdentificationCategoryText>CategoryX</nc:IdentificationCategoryText> <nc:IdentificationID>cc5adeb7</nc:IdentificationID> <nc:IdentificationCategoryText>CategoryY</nc:IdentificationCategoryText> </an-element> Could be instead: <an-element> <extension:CategoryX>1000</extension:CategoryX> <extension:CategoryY>cc5adeb7</extension:CategoryY> </an-element>

29. ECF Issues • Why are you asking for ECF • What security issues exist • External Source • Case specific issues • What technical issues exist • Document specific data • Multi-case filing • Partial approval • Levels of status response • Payment PCI compliance • Refile issues • Time Stamp 28

30. attorney Attorney External filer support Filer Interface Internet Filer Interface AOC API CMS Filer Interface API API Internet Douments Law Firm Court Review Notification Law Firm CMS Middleware API API State Agemcy State Agemcy CMS CMS

31. Future ECF SIP specifications • IBM MQ • In draft • Updates to Web Service SIP • New versions of Global Reference Architecture (GRA) Web Services SIP? • Others?

32. Future Outreach and Training • Outreach opportunities • Recruit NIEM and Global Reference Architecture implementers? • Training initiatives • Online training in development? • Needs funding for hosting • Reference implementation? • Needs developer and funding

33. Future of the ECF TC • Specification approval • ECF Core Spec. to OASIS Standard • ECF SIPs to Committee Specification • Specification maintenance • Approval of Errata • Outreach and training • Online training • Reference implementation? • Specification development • New versions of core? • New SIPs? • Testing and conformance • Conformance testing?

34. Future of the LegalXML Member Section New TCs? Merge with e-gov?

35. ECF TC Conference Call • Call-in number: 800-503-2899 • Access code: 3174563# • Optional Chat/Queue: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/oasis-ecf • Next conference call: • November 8, 2011, 11am – noon EST • Next face-to-face meeting: • ??