Overview: Seattle-based legal AI platform ($91M total funding: $25M Series A Aug 2024, $60M Series B Apr 2025 led by Sapphire Ventures with Thomson Reuters Ventures). Founded 2021 by former Microsoft engineers Jerry Zhou and Kyle Lam. 27,000+ cases processed, claims $1B+ in settlements supported. Purpose-built exclusively for plaintiff-side PI and mass tort.
Product Suite:
| Product |
Capabilities |
| Supio Inbound |
AI voice agent for 24/7 intake, multi-channel (voice/SMS/web/email), automated case qualification and scoring |
| Case Engine (pre-litigation) |
Instant Timelines (auto-generated medical chronologies), Case Signals (AI flags treatment gaps, missing bills, causation issues), Instant Demands (settlement-ready demand letters with ICD codes), Case Economics (automated billing ledger, lien tracking, settlement projections) |
| Case Bench (litigation) |
Drafting Agents (complaints, motions, interrogatories, expert disclosures), Lookalike Drafting (match firm's style from uploaded samples), Depositions (real-time transcription, contradiction detection, cross-referencing against full case file), Exhibit Builder (auto-generated packages with Bates stamping) |
| AI Assistant |
Chat + Deep Thinking modes over full case file, unlimited queries, prompt library, firm-wide knowledge base |
| Integrations |
Two-way sync with Filevine, Litify, SmartAdvocate, CasePeer, MyCase; Thomson Reuters CoCounsel partnership; Supio API for custom builds |
AI Architecture: "CaseAware AI" with 10 specialized expert models tuned for plaintiff law, handling 112+ case types. RAG with hybrid semantic/exact-match retrieval. Human expert verification on all outputs (claims 97% accuracy). LLM vendors not publicly disclosed.
Security: SOC 2 Type II (Vanta), HIPAA compliant, GDPR compliant, case-level data isolation, explicit no-training commitment.
Pricing: Custom only, sales-led. Positions as "flat pricing: no page limits, no demand-type tiers, no edit penalties" (competitive against EvenUp's per-demand model). Case studies claim $500-$1K savings per case.
Claimed Metrics: 28% higher settlements, 62% increase in caseload capacity, 97% accuracy rate.
What Supio Does Well (mirror or learn from):
- End-to-end lifecycle coverage: intake through trial in one platform. Creates genuine switching cost.
- Source-linked everything: every output cites specific document + page/line. Critical for attorney trust.
- Case Economics module: automated billing ledgers with CPT codes, lien reconciliation, settlement scenario modeling. A real workflow innovation.
- Two-way CMS integrations: not just sending data to Supio, but pushing structured data back. Technically harder and more valuable.
- Domain-specific AI models: distinguishing facts from opinions, understanding medical codes, recognizing treatment gaps. Genuine domain tuning vs. general-purpose.
- Human verification layer: medical/legal experts verify all AI outputs. Defensible accuracy claim.
- Rapid product velocity: from stealth (Aug 2024) to depositions, agentic drafting, voice intake, exhibit building in ~16 months.
Gaps that define our opportunity:
- Zero forensic evidence collection: Supio analyzes documents already in your possession. No web archiving, social media capture, screenshot preservation, or cryptographic hashing for chain of custody.
- Strictly PI/mass tort: family law, harassment, stalking, employment, and criminal defense are entirely unserved. Founders have acknowledged family law is on the horizon but are explicitly holding off.
- No client-facing portal: clients cannot see case status, review documents, or communicate through Supio. Platform is attorney/paralegal-only.
- No chain of custody infrastructure: security architecture protects data from breach, but nothing addresses proving evidentiary integrity for collected materials.
- Privilege architecture not articulated: heavy on HIPAA/SOC2 marketing, silent on how outputs interact with work product doctrine post-Heppner.
- No automated evidence collection from live sources: no ability to monitor social media, capture web pages, or ingest evidence from external platforms.
Strategic Assessment: Supio confirms the "vertical AI evidence tool" business model at scale ($91M funding, Thomson Reuters partnership). But it is architecturally a document analysis platform, not an evidence collection and preservation platform. Intactus occupies a different position in the evidence lifecycle: we start at capture, they start at analysis. The family law and harassment markets are available to own before Supio expands.
Sources: supio.com, TechCrunch (Aug 2024, Apr 2025), Sapphire Ventures blog, BusinessWire, LawNext, PRNewswire
Overview: Atlanta-based, founded 2015 by Jeff Kerr. Bootstrapped, ~8 employees. Cloud-native litigation fact management / case chronology software. Won TechnoLawyer Top 25 (2016). Used by Washington Post for Afghanistan Papers investigation. The closest existing product to Intactus's timeline and evidence organization value proposition.
Product Suite:
| Feature |
Capabilities |
| Fact Chronologies |
Flagship: link facts to exact locations in source documents/audio/video. Dynamic timelines that evolve with new evidence. Filter by issue, person, date range. |
| Document Reviewer |
Patent-pending interface. Highlight text to create fact entries with auto-populated citations. Annotations, assignments, activity feed. |
| Deposition Transcripts |
Dedicated viewer with Bluebook-correct auto-citation, designation support, exhibit linkage, full-text search. |
| Audio/Video Review |
Auto-transcription (Google Speech), synchronized note-taking, time-stamped clip creation. |
| AI: Document Intelligence (Apr 2025) |
AI summarization of lengthy documents, entity extraction (people, orgs, dates, locations, events) with hyperlinked occurrences. |
| AI: Suggested Facts (Jun 2025) |
AI scans documents to propose factual statements with entity/issue linkages. Attorney accepts, edits, or dismisses. |
| AI Assistant |
Chat scoped to case documents only (RAG). Clickable citations to source passages. No general legal research. |
| Reports |
8 types: Facts by Issues, Entities & Documents, Facts Spreadsheet, Simple/Detailed Chronology, Entities with Facts, Case Archive Bundle. |
| Collaboration |
Role-based permissions, 2 free guest users per case (co-counsel, experts, clients). |
Pricing:
| Plan |
Annual (per user/month) |
Monthly |
Key Limits |
| Starter |
$30 |
$40 |
20 docs/case, no AI, no full-text search |
| Advanced AI |
$75 |
$100 |
Unlimited docs, all AI features, usage credits |
| Enterprise |
Custom |
Custom |
20+ users, SSO, dedicated support |
Plus usage-based overages: OCR ($1/100 pages), transcription ($0.06/min), storage ($10/GB/month).
AI Architecture: Google Vision OCR, Google Speech transcription, OpenAI models (per third-party analysis). Attorney-in-the-loop design: every AI output requires human review before entering the case record.
Security: TLS + AES-256 encryption, AWS VPC, 2FA, virus scanning, audit logging. HIPAA available as add-on. No SOC 2 or ISO certifications. No explicit data isolation or no-training commitments for AI processing.
What CaseFleet Does Well (and our strategic response):
- Fact-to-document linkage model: every fact links to an exact location in a source document. Response: Adopted. Intactus implements a Fact Schema with passage-level citations (character offsets, page/line for PDFs) baked into the ingestion pipeline from Phase 1b. Every extracted fact links to the exact source text span. This matches CaseFleet's core organizing principle while adding forensic provenance CaseFleet lacks.
- Attorney-in-the-loop AI: AI suggests, attorney approves. Response: Adapted with a two-tier model. Auto-computed metadata (classifications, summaries, entities) stores automatically, with no approval gate slowing ingestion. Facts and assertions require explicit attorney review with batch approve UX for efficiency. This gives us CaseFleet's professional responsibility defensibility without sacrificing automated intake speed.
- Deposition transcript management: Bluebook citation generation, designation support, and exhibit linkage. Response: Adopted for Phase 2. Dedicated transcript viewer with Bluebook citations, designations, exhibit linkage, and full-text search. Key differentiator: cross-referencing deposition testimony against the evidence vault (social media, emails, financial records) to surface contradictions, something CaseFleet cannot do because they lack the capture layer.
- Report variety: 8 report types covering the litigation lifecycle. Response: Matched and exceeded. 9 named report types across Phase 1b and Phase 2 (Case Timeline, Annotated Timeline, Evidence Index, Entity Map, Evidence Ledger, Vault Export, Custody Certificate, Entity Dossier, Case Brief). Several are structurally impossible for CaseFleet: Custody Certificate (chain-of-custody declaration), Vault Export (full manifest + hash verification), Case Brief (AI-synthesized narrative).
- Guest user collaboration: free external collaborators for co-counsel and experts. Response: Adopted for Phase 2. Guest role with read-only access to the attorney dashboard, scoped to specific cases. Distinct from the client portal. Two free guest slots per case.
- Audio/video review with auto-transcription: synchronized note-taking and auto-clip generation. Response: Split across phases. Phase 2: basic upload + Whisper transcription + searchable transcript as evidence item (covers 90% of family law use cases). Phase 3: rich media review with clip extraction, transcript-linked playback, and passage-level transcript citations.
- Accessible pricing: $75/user/month for full AI. Response: Competitive positioning. Intactus at $99/mo (Vault) and $149/mo (Vault + Analysis) is ~30-100% more than CaseFleet, but delivers forensic capture, chain of custody, client portal, privilege-safe AI, and no overage fees (CaseFleet charges $1/100 OCR pages, $0.06/min transcription, $10/GB/month storage). The total cost of ownership comparison favors Intactus for evidence-heavy cases.
Gaps that define our opportunity:
- Zero forensic evidence capture or preservation: CaseFleet is a post-collection tool only. No web archiving, no hash verification, no chain of custody at point of capture.
- No chain of custody tracking: no cryptographic hash, no custody declaration generation, no tamper-evident manifest. Their audit log is for team coordination, not forensic integrity.
- No automated evidence collection: all evidence entry is manual upload. No automated ingestion from email, web, or social media.
- No privilege-safe AI architecture: sends documents through Google and OpenAI services with no explicit no-training agreements, no SOC 2, no discussion of data isolation. Vulnerable post-Heppner.
- No client portal: guest users see the same interface as staff. No purpose-built client view with simplified evidence submission, case status, or secure messaging.
- No integrations ecosystem: no API, no Zapier, no Microsoft 365, no Clio/MyCase, no Relativity. Completely closed.
- No Bates stamping or document redaction: repeatedly requested by users, not yet built.
- Weak mobile experience: no native app, reported display issues on iPhone.
- Weak visual timeline: breaks down with incomplete data. Tabular formats are reliable but not visually compelling.
User Sentiment (41 reviews across platforms, 91% satisfaction): praise for chronology feature ("irreplaceable"), customer support, and ease of use. Criticism of pricing (especially new storage fees), Starter plan limits, no integrations, and no Bates stamping.
Strategic Assessment: CaseFleet is the tool Intactus is most likely to be compared to by attorneys evaluating timeline/evidence organization capabilities. But CaseFleet starts after evidence is collected; attorneys must capture and organize evidence elsewhere, then manually upload it. Intactus starts at capture and flows through to analysis and court output. The forensic integrity layer (hashing, chain of custody, tamper-evident manifest) is a category-defining differentiator CaseFleet cannot easily replicate. Their lack of SOC 2 and privilege-safe AI architecture are structural weaknesses in a post-Heppner market.
Sources: casefleet.com, Lawyerist review, ABA Journal, Capterra, SoftwareFinder, CaseFleet blog
Overview: Vancouver, BC-based. Founded 2024 by Alistair Vigier. Pre-seed (angel + Canadian government grants, no VC). ~4,000 users in 8 months with zero paid advertising. AI legal research and document automation, not a case management or evidence tool. Competes against LexisNexis and Westlaw, not Intactus.
Product Suite:
| Product |
Capabilities |
| Casey |
AI legal research over 100M+ court decisions (Canada + US). Natural language queries, jurisdictional filtering, document upload/review, contract risk flagging, legal memo/brief generation, multi-language (EN/FR/ES/ZH). |
| CaseForm |
AI court form auto-population from existing filings. Launched via AffiniPay/MyCase partnership (Jul 2025). California initially, 50-state expansion planned. |
| Bespoke Agent |
Custom AI trained on firm's own document history (e.g., 5,000 separation agreements → AI generates new ones matching firm's style). |
| Synthium DataHub |
Enterprise document governance for regulated industries (legal, insurance, healthcare, government). |
Pricing: CA$49.99/month (Standard), roughly 10x cheaper than Westlaw/LexisNexis. Bespoke Agent at ~CA$99/month. Enterprise pricing custom.
Security: SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO/IEC 42001 (AI management), GDPR, CCPA. Zero data retention by default.
Relevance to Intactus: Caseway is not a competitor; it occupies a different category (legal research vs. evidence management). It is worth monitoring because:
- Distribution strategy is instructive: embedding into MyCase/AffiniPay rather than building a full practice management stack. Intactus should consider similar integration plays with Clio/MyCase rather than competing with them.
- Bespoke Agent is a stickiness model: custom firm-specific AI trained on proprietary documents creates real switching costs. Intactus could consider practice-area-specific analysis lenses that learn from a firm's case history.
- Access-to-justice narrative: Caseway's mission framing resonates with courts, governments, and academic funders. Intactus's victim self-service angle carries similar narrative power.
- Pricing pressure: at CA$49.99/month for AI-powered legal tools, Caseway sets an expectation for what small-firm attorneys consider reasonable. Our $149/month Vault + Analysis tier needs to clearly demonstrate value beyond research.
Risks: CanLII copyright lawsuit (reportedly moving toward settlement), pre-seed stage fragility, Trustpilot complaints about billing/cancellation UX, US coverage still nascent.
Sources: caseway.ai, BetaKit, LawNext, IT Brief Canada, Vancouver Tech Journal, Advocate Daily
