Plaintiff-Side Employment Cases: Getting the Employer’s Meeting Recordings and AI Transcripts Before They Are Deleted

Sean H. Sobel
Erica Roberts
Tracey Zhang
Sean H. Sobel | Sobel Law Solutions, LLC
Erica Roberts | Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight, LLP
Tracey Zhang | Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight, LLP

Live Video-Broadcast: December 18, 2026

2 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

The meeting that proves your client’s case is on a retention timer the employer controls

Employers now record meetings and generate AI transcripts and summaries through Microsoft Teams, Zoom AI Companion, Copilot recaps and automated notetaker bots. Those records sit under retention policies and settings the employer chooses, and many auto-delete by default. In a discrimination, disability, age or leave case, the recording is now the record of what the manager said.

Ask the wrong intake questions and the client never mentions the Teams recording. Send a preservation letter that names no platform or retention setting and the employer answers “no documents responsive.” Serve a Rule 34 set without the storage map and the objections narrow nothing at the meet-and-confer. Let the recording expire and the manager testifies from the AI summary, not the audio.

Attendees leave with intake questions aimed at discovering AI usage and preservation-letter language that anticipates the privilege defenses. They also take home a 29 C.F.R. § 1602.14 approach for the charge, an ESI plan and Rule 34 set built from the storage map, and a 30(b)(6) topic list that builds the deletion record. Every item is a judgment call — which platform to name, which objection to narrow, when to play the audio — that no form bank supplies.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • The Two Clocks
    How the charge period runs against the employer’s recording and AI retention policies, and why the shorter clock sets the preservation deadline.
  • Platforms and Retention Settings
    How the AI platforms commonly used in employment settings — Teams, Zoom AI Companion, Copilot recaps and notetaker bots — retain records, and how retention policy types and settings decide what survives.
  • Intake That Finds AI Usage
    How intake questions aimed at discovering AI usage change what you ask a discrimination, disability, age or leave client in the first meeting.
  • Preservation Letters and the Charge
    How to draft preservation-letter language, anticipate the privilege defenses it draws, and carry 29 C.F.R. § 1602.14 into the EEOC charge.
  • Discovery Built on the Storage Map
    How to build the ESI plan and Rule 34 set from the storage map, test a “no documents responsive” answer by asking why the record would not exist, and narrow objections at the meet-and-confer.
  • Proving Deletion and Using the Audio
    How to notice the 30(b)(6) IT administrator deposition, build the deletion record when the recording is gone, and depose the manager with the audio queued.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: December 18, 2026

  • 2:30 pm – 4:40 pm Eastern
  • 1:30 pm – 3:40 pm Central
  • 12:30 pm – 2:40 pm Mountain
  • 11:03 am – 1:40 pm Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Sean H. Sobel, Founding Attorney | Sobel Law Solutions, LLC

Sean H. Sobel is the Founding Attorney of Sobel Law Solutions, LLC in Cleveland, Ohio, where he represents employees in discrimination, harassment, retaliation, FMLA, severance and non-compete matters across the state. His current docket includes a federal Americans with Disabilities Act case and a Title VII and Ohio R.C. 4112 harassment, discrimination and retaliation case, both in active discovery, alongside an Age Discrimination in Employment Act collective action and federal FMLA retaliation litigation. Clients work directly with him rather than with a paralegal or junior associate.

  • Education & Credentials

Mr. Sobel earned his J.D. from Case Western Reserve University School of Law and his B.A. in Political Science from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is admitted to practice in Ohio, before the U.S. District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts of Ohio, and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Super Lawyers has recognized Mr. Sobel for 14 consecutive years, naming him a Rising Star every year from 2014 through 2025 and selecting him to the full Super Lawyers list for 2026 and 2027. He holds a 10.0 “Superb” Avvo rating and has been named one of the Three Best Rated Top 3 Employment Lawyers in Cleveland.

  • Professional Involvement

Mr. Sobel presented Session 1 of “Separation and Release Agreements When the Clause Itself Is the Violation” through the Federal Bar Association CLE program and myLawCLE on October 29, 2026. With Andrew November, he authored “When Severance Agreements Bar ERISA Long-Term Disability Claims” in the January/February 2026 issue of the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Journal. He also maintains a national Title IX practice, advising complainants and respondents and conducting independent investigations for colleges and universities.

  • Experience

Mr. Sobel founded Sobel Law Solutions, LLC in March 2026 after more than fifteen years in practice. His federal litigation includes ADA discrimination, FMLA retaliation, ADEA collective actions, Section 1983 due process, and pregnancy discrimination matters. In Ohio state court, he represents employees in Title VII and R.C. 4112 sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and retaliation litigation. His practice also encompasses wage and hour, sales commission, whistleblower and qui tam, physician and executive contracts, and physician discipline and peer review.

 

Erica Roberts, Attorney | Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight, LLP

Erica Roberts is an attorney at Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight, LLP, where she represents individuals alleging gender and race discrimination and retaliation against their employers, including high tech companies and law firms. She has written on how AI hiring platforms and “cultural fit” assessments can be analyzed for bias and on what an employment discrimination lawsuit over AI looks like, and her practice extends to qui tam whistleblower and public interest litigation on behalf of governments, individuals and classes.

  • Education & Credentials

Ms. Roberts earned her J.D. with honors from the University of Texas School of Law and her B.A. in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles. During law school she interned for Texas RioGrande Legal Aid and three law firms, served as a Pro Bono Scholar with the Expunction Project, and was a student attorney in the Immigration Clinic. She is admitted to the bars of Texas (2023) and the District of Columbia (2024).

  • Recognition & Leadership

Ms. Roberts co-authored “How AI ‘Cultural Fit’ Assessments Can Be Analyzed For Bias” (Law360, November 2023) and the three-part series “Was I Discriminated Against by AI?”, which covers AI screening of job applications, bias in AI hiring platforms, and what an employment discrimination lawsuit looks like. Her other writing includes co-authored pieces on race-based hair protections (Law360, July 2024) and the legal rights of LGBTQ employees in D.C. (Washington Blade, May 2024), a 2024 letter supporting California Senate Bill 1137, and 2026 articles for The Anti-Fraud Coalition on relator shares and CFTC whistleblower awards.

  • Professional Involvement

Before joining the firm, Ms. Roberts clerked for Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. She has also co-authored a three-part series on the wage gap and equal pay and a six-part series on government fraud enforcement.

  • Experience

Ms. Roberts represents individuals bringing gender and race discrimination and retaliation claims against employers, including high tech companies and law firms. She is counsel in a race discrimination class action on behalf of current and former African American Deputy U.S. Marshals and Detention Enforcement Officers, and in a class action for former West Monroe Partners employees over ESOP stock cash-outs. Her qui tam work includes representing the whistleblower whose allegations that Invitation Homes skipped required renovation permits in California cities led to a $19.9 million settlement, sealed and unsealed qui tam suits, and representation of local governments suing opioid manufacturers, distributors and pharmacy benefit managers.

 

Tracey Zhang, Attorney | Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight, LLP

Tracey Zhang is an attorney in the Washington, DC office of Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight, LLP, where her matters include the West Monroe Partners Employee Stock Ownership Plan ERISA class action. She joined the firm after clerkships in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit and prior practice at Cleary Gottlieb.

  • Education & Credentials

Ms. Zhang earned her J.D., magna cum laude, from Georgetown University Law Center and her B.S.F.S., cum laude, from Georgetown University. At Georgetown Law she was Senior Notes Editor of the Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law, a student attorney in the Civil Rights Clinic, a research assistant for Professor Emma Jordan, and vice president of the Women of Color Collective. She is admitted to the District of Columbia bar (2021), the U.S. Supreme Court, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Ms. Zhang received CALI awards and Special Pro Bono Pledge Recognition for more than 100 hours of pro bono service during law school. She is the author of “Making Inclusionary Zoning More Inclusive,” published in the Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy in Fall 2019.

  • Professional Involvement

Ms. Zhang clerked for the Hon. Arenda L. Wright Allen of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia and for the Hon. Gregory A. Phillips of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Before her clerkships she practiced at Cleary Gottlieb.

  • Experience

At Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight, Ms. Zhang’s matters include the West Monroe Partners Employee Stock Ownership Plan ERISA class action. Her litigation background combines a district court clerkship, a federal appellate clerkship, her earlier practice at Cleary Gottlieb, and student-attorney work in the Georgetown Law Civil Rights Clinic.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – Preserving Employer Meeting Recordings and AI Transcripts From Intake Through the EEOC Charge | Erica Roberts & Tracey Zhang | 2:30pm – 3:30pm

This session teaches employee-side employment lawyers how to preserve an employer’s Teams, Zoom and notetaker-bot recordings, transcripts and AI summaries from first intake through the EEOC charge, before default expiration and audit-log aging erase them. The hour covers common AI platforms that retain records, types of AI retention policies and settings, intake questions aimed at discovering AI usage, considerations and draft language for preservation letters, anticipated privilege defenses, and 29 C.F.R. § 1602.14 considerations.

BREAK | 3:30pm – 3:40pm

SESSION 2 – Requesting Employer Meeting Recordings and AI Summaries in Discovery and Proving Their Deletion | Sean H. Sobel | 3:40pm – 4:40pm

This session teaches employee-side employment counsel how to request employer Teams recordings, Copilot recaps, Zoom AI Companion summaries and notetaker-bot transcripts in federal discovery. The hour covers how to break down a “no documents responsive” answer, what to ask the IT administrator at a 30(b)(6) deposition, how to build the trigger-date and deletion record, and how to play the audio against a manager.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Colorado

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

District of Columbia

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Delaware

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Florida

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Georgia

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Iowa

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Idaho

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Illinois

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Indiana

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Kansas

Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive

Kentucky

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Louisiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Massachusetts

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maryland

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maine

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Michigan

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Minnesota

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Montana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
Nebraska

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

myLawCLE reports attendance to Nebraska on each attorney’s behalf for all programs. Please do not self-report.
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Nevada

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Oklahoma

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

Oregon

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Rhode Island

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

South Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

South Dakota

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Tennessee

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Utah

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Virginia

Not Eligible
2 General Hours

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Washington

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 Law & Legal Hours

Receive CLE credit in Washington via attorney submission.
Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

West Virginia

Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General

Wyoming

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars