imagine this:

YOUR company,


"Greetings, Professor Falken. A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."

WarGames (1983) (4:05)

Litigation is like that. On defense, even when you win, you lose. But it doesn't have to be that way.

Intraspexion trains a "deep learning" algorithm to provide an early warning of a specific litigation risk to in-house counsel in near real time, so that in-house counsel can conduct an investigation, and then help control group executives address the issue and, hopefully, in time to avoid the lawsuit altogether.

For the first time, there is a technology enabling your company to go from reactive to proactive.

The phrase deep learning refers to a neural network algorithm which allows computers to learn. For an introduction, please see this TED talk by Jeremy Howard,"The wonderful and terrifying implications of computers that can learn." (Under 20 minutes; over 240,000 views.)  


On November 7-9, 2016, Intraspexion is co-sponsoring the AI World Conference & Exposition 2016 in San Francisco. Nick Brestoff, Intraspexion's founder and CEO, will give a 20-minute talk as part of the Conference's AI Solutions Theater. For information about the Conference:

On September 15, 2016, our Team demonstrated (internally) an enterprise-level system. We agree that we've achieved a state known as a Minimal Viable Product (MVP). We can now go from processing, say, last night's emails, to and through a deep learning algorithm trained to assess a specific litigation risk, and then to a User Interface (UI). The UI presents a distribution of risky emails as a bar graph (for visualization of the data); a spreadsheet which ranks the risky emails; and buttons which allow in-house counsel to call the high-ranking emails (in their native state) to the fore for review. We'll post a screencast to present the UI in the very near future.

On September 8, 2016, because its first interview with Nick Brestoff reached most viewed status in August, AI Trends asked him about the "business case" for using deep learning to achieve less litigation. That interview, "Why Intraspexion's Use of Deep Learning May Be Deeply Valuable," is here:

On August 30, 2016, NVIDIA (NASDAQ: NVDA) informed Intraspexion that it had been accepted into NVIDIA's Inception Program for AI startups. The program, announced on June 8, 2016, will supercharge Intraspexion's development. NVIDIA's program overview is here:  

On August 22, 2016, AI Trends published an interview with Nick Brestoff. The article was (by far) the most viewed article that month, despite the late publication date. The article, "Here's What Happens When A Deep Litigator Understands Deep Learning," is here:

When AI Trends asked Brestoff to explain why Intraspexion was attracting such high interest, Brestoff put it this way: "Litigation is like a dragon.It burns up profits, and no one's been able to curtail it. Intraspexion is a dragon-slayer with a new weapon. A deep learning sword." 

Patent pending.

On July 1, 2016, Nick Brestoff filed a provisional patent application entitled "Using classified text and deep learning algorithms to identify risk and provide early warning." The application follows decisions by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Enfish LLC v. Microsoft Corp., __ Fed. Cir. __, U.S. App. LEXIS 8699, 2016 WL 2756255 (Fed. Cir. May 12, 2016) and Bascom Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, Case No. 2015-1763, __ Fed. Cir. __ (June 27, 2016) ("As is the case here, an inventive concept can be found in the non-conventional and non-generic arrangement of known, conventional pieces.").   

By the Way, What's the Business Case?

"Companies worldwide spend $3 trillion a year trying to prevent, detect and deal with some kind of misconduct. If you can just capture one-tenth of one percent, it's a $3 billion idea." -- Bennett B. Borden, partner & Chief Data Scientist, Drinker Biddle & Reath (July 2015).

With litigation risk in mind, the average cost of commercial tort litigation, per a Towers Watson report for 2001 through 2010, is an average of $160 billion "per year." But how much is that pain on a "per case" basis? As CEO Nick Brestoff showed in his book (Preventing Litigation: An Early Warning System, Etc., endorsed by Sir Richard Susskind), the cost (i.e., payouts for settlements and verdicts, defense attorneys fees, and administrative costs) is at least this much:

$350,000 per case


So if your company avoids just three average lawsuits, it preserves net profit of over $1 million.

There's a lot of work for us to do.

We offer our system only to enterprise legal departments, and there are about 10,000 legal departments in the U.S. "Of the 10,000 legal departments in the U.S., 31% have less than 10 attorneys, 59% have between 10 and 39 attorneys, and 10% have more than 40 attorneys on staff." Catching the Wave: Legal Technology Spend at $3 Billion and Growing, p. 2 (Mitratech Holdings, Inc., February 15, 2016).

Will the System Replace Attorneys?

No. Our system augments the intelligence of in-house attorneys, and empowers them to make the decisions. In-house attorneys are currently blind to the risks in their company's own internal communications, even though they are closest to that data. With Intraspexion, in-house counsel will be able to see those risks. Then they can investigate and advise control group executives who, in turn, will decide what action to take to avoid the lawsuit.   


Of course, you may say, "Bah, it can't be done."

But because we've learned how to train a deep learning algorithm to detect the risk of an employment discrimination lawsuit (for starters), we've already done it.

Please watch our (silent) "explainer" video. It takes only about five (5) minutes

Then please see the one (1) minute capstone video.

Videos Designed By Ideas in Motion.

we are A TEAM

of co-founders

Nick Brestoff  Founder / CEO  Personal email:; 661-312-8518  (Mobile)  

Nick Brestoff
Founder / CEO

Personal email:; 661-312-8518 (Mobile)

Sean La Roque-Doherty  Attorney; former Technology Editor,  Legaltech News

Sean La Roque-Doherty
Attorney; former Technology Editor, Legaltech News

Steve Ardire  Advisor & Acting CMO  Personal email: ; @sardire; 360-868-4435 (Mobile)

Steve Ardire
Advisor & Acting CMO

Personal email:; @sardire; 360-868-4435 (Mobile)

Dan Cotman  IP attorney

Dan Cotman
IP attorney

F Scott Barker   Programmer, Enterprise Email Test Data

F Scott Barker
Programmer, Enterprise Email Test Data

Jagannath Rajagopal  Programmer, Deep Learning Algorithms

Jagannath Rajagopal
Programmer, Deep Learning Algorithms

Mike Becker   Programmer, Data Mining

Mike Becker
Programmer, Data Mining

Board of Advisors

  • Z. Jill Barclift, Professor of Law at the Hamline Mitchell School of Law (St. Paul, MN)
  • Thomas D. Barton, the Louis and Hermoine Brown Professor of Law at California Western   School of Law (San Diego, CA)
  • Harold A. Brown, Partner, Gang Tyre Ramer & Brown (Beverly Hills, CA)
  • James P. Groton, Partner (ret.) at Sutherland, Asbill &  Brennan (Atlanta, GA)

A demo by Our Team

When you connect with us, we'll show you the desktop screens you 'll see after you receive an alert from the system. One screen visualizes the systems results. Another screen lets you scan and access a risky email for your review. The system provides you with the power to be aware of the internal risky data you cannot now see. In the demo, we use emails from portions of the Enron dataset. You'll see different visualizations for each dataset, and see for yourself that the system is a snap to use.  

A Free, No Obligation

TRIAL When We Join


Corporate legal departments have had to deal with now-terminated employment discrimination litigation matters where, during eDiscovery, emails were produced. Some of these emails were risky and didn't help your defense, or worse, were "smoking guns."

Without violating a confidentiality provision in your settlement agreement, YOU (with our help) can run trials on your now-terminated lawsuits at no charge.

When our system surfaces risky emails, and you compare the dates of those emails with the date the lawsuit was filed, you will know whether or not our system would have given you a reasonable chance to be proactive, instead of reactive.


Note: The text shaded below in blue are hyperlinks.


On May 2-4, 2016, Intraspexion co-sponsored the 2016 Institute of the Corporate Legal Operations Consortium (, held in San Francisco, California, and presented the 5 minute video, above.


On September 8, 2016, AI Trends published a second interview with Nick Brestoff. Click on the title to read the article: Why Intraspexion's Use of Deep Learning May Be Deeply Valuable.

On August 22, 2016, AI Trends published an interview with Intraspexion's CEO Nick Brestoff. Click on the title to read the article: Here’s What Happens When a Deep Litigator Understands Deep Learning. (Of 19 articles posted on AI Trends in August 2016, AI Trends reported that this article was the "most viewed.")

On July 20, 2016 in Legaltech News: Intraspexion (spelled as Introspection) was mentioned in "A Call to Legal Tech: AI is Here," an interview with Larry Bridgesmith, CEO of Legal Alignment and an Adjunct Law Professor at Vanderbilt University. He described Intraspexion as being "able to look into an organization's data and find the potential for legal violations before they occur and provide information on how to prevent them from occurring." In mid-September, 2016, Prof. Bridgesmith joined our Team.

Privacy Issue

We are aware that monitoring emails raises a significant privacy issue. In Holmes v. Petrovich Dev. Co., LLC, 191 Cal.App.4th 1047, 1068-69, 119 Cal.Rptr.3d 878 (2011) (Holmes), the California Court of Appeal held that an employee had no expectation of privacy in emails she sent to her attorney from a company computer because the company had a policy against using computers for personal reasons and the policy stated that the company could monitor all emails. Id. at 1068-71, 119 Cal.Rptr.3d 878. The court in Holmes emphasized that the computer used to send the emails "belong[ed] to the [company]," that the company had a policy against using its computers for personal reasons, and that the employee was "aware of and agree[d] to these conditions." Id. at 1068, 119 Cal.Rptr.3d 878; see also id. at 1068-69, 119 Cal.Rptr.3d 878 ("Holmes used her employer's company e-mail account after being warned that it was to be used only for company business, that e-mails were not private, and that the company would randomly and periodically monitor its technology resources to ensure compliance with the policy.").

However, some courts have distinguished Holmes, depending on the facts. Suppose, for example, that employee never reads or agrees to the “no privacy” policy or agrees to the policy but someone in authority undermines the policy by conduct; or that the company knows the employee is using a company device, e.g., a smart phone, for personal purposes, pays to use it, and the company does not enforce the policy. In such cases, Holmes may be held not to apply. See, e.g., Mintz v. Mark Bartelstein & Assoc., Inc., 885 F.Supp.2d 987, 998 (2012).


1. In January 2016, Corporate Counsel published Nick's article, Building A Litigation Risk Profile, Which Could Save Your Company Money.

2. In January 2016, Nick announced in a Corporate Counsel interview that he had formed Intraspexion and had successfully applied Deep Learning to some of the emails in the Enron corpus to find a risk of employment discrimination.

3. In August 2015, Business Expert Press published Preventing Litigation: An Early Warning System to Get Big Value Out of Big Data. Nick Brestoff is the primary author, writing 20 out of 25 chapters. The book was endorsed by Richard Susskind, one the legal profession's most respected thought leaders. All five (5) reader reviews on Amazon have given the book 5 out of 5 stars. Because the copyright is owned by Business Expert Press, we cannot provide you with a link. You can find the book at or at

4. In October 2012, he proposed in this LTN article that technology would soon enable in-house counsel to prevent litigation, not just manage it.


On August 5, 2016, Nick Brestoff presented Intraspexion's business case and proof of concept to the general session of the Sinch LegalTech Conference 2016 in Sydney, Australia.

Ready to

Decrease Litigation?

Name *