There are 5 key takeaways from this opinion: 

1. More than just approved: Judge Peck actively encourages the use of predictive coding, noting that "it may save the producing party (or both parties) significant amounts of legal fees in document review."
2. Better than the alternatives: Judge Peck states "the Court determined that the use of predictive coding was appropriate considering...the superiority of computer-assisted review to the available alternatives (i.e., linear manual review or keyword searches)."  
3. Better than unattainable perfection: The Judge notes: "the idea is not to make this perfect, it's not going to be perfect. The idea is to make it significantly better than the alternatives without nearly as much cost."
4. More statistics than maths: The court's focus is on statistically valid results rather than the mathematics of the algorithms. Quoting his article on predictive coding, Judge Peck states: "I may be less interested in the science behind the "black box" of the vendor's software than in whether it produced responsive documents with reasonably high recall and high precision."
5. More than just technology: Judge Peck makes clear the need to "design an appropriate process, including use of available technology, with appropriate quality control testing, to review and produce relevant ESI."  

Equivio can assist you with designing and implementing a predictive coding process, using our market-leading Relevance application, that allows you to leverage the benefits of computer-assisted review in a defensible and transparent manner.

Meanwhile, you might like to read this article from Law360 - it provides some very useful insights on the likely impact of Judge Peck's historical opinion.