# Extract Doj Preservation Notice Obligations > Prioritized compliance gap report extracting preservation obligations from a government preservation notice and any supplemental correspondence, identifying document categories, enumerated technology systems, auto-deletion suspension requirements, and any imaging or collection deadlines, with recommended remedial steps. - Skill: `finchipaiorg/extract-doj-preservation-notice-obligations` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add finchipaiorg/extract-doj-preservation-notice-obligations` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/finchipaiorg/extract-doj-preservation-notice-obligations/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Docs & Writing - Author: FinchipAIOrg (https://skillmd.com/u/finchipaiorg) - Updated: 2026-09-22 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/finchipaiorg/extract-doj-preservation-notice-obligations --- # Skill: Extract Obligations from Government Preservation Notice — Compliance Gap Report ## 1. Subject-matter triage (only if applicable) - Treat the notice set as a document-preservation and data-retention compliance exercise, not a merits analysis. - First identify whether the source set includes: a primary preservation notice, supplemental correspondence, and internal implementation materials. - If more than one notice or letter exists, treat the broadest applicable scope as controlling unless a later document clearly narrows a prior obligation. - If the source set references personal devices, collaboration tools, or auto-delete settings, treat those as implementation-critical, not peripheral. ## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting - The time period is taken from only one document instead of the full notice set, causing the report to miss the controlling start or end boundary. - Supplemental correspondence that adds categories, systems, or deadlines is ignored. - Specific technology platforms are summarized generically, leaving IT without a usable implementation list. - Platform-level hold requirements are not separated from ordinary user-level preservation steps. - Cloud or collaboration auto-deletion risk is described abstractly rather than as an immediate control issue. - Imaging or collection deadlines are paraphrased instead of calendared as hard obligations. - BYOD scope is overlooked even when the notice reaches business-use personal devices. - The report describes gaps but does not convert them into prioritized remedial actions. ## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply **Government preservation notice conventions** - A preservation notice may demand preservation of documents, ESI, communications, metadata, and device or system data relevant to an investigation. - Supplemental letters can expand the preservation universe; each later document must be read for added categories, extended dates, and implementation instructions. - The operative scope is the union of all applicable notice documents, subject to any express narrowing language. **Preservation implementation conventions** - A legally meaningful hold typically requires both legal instruction and technical implementation. - Company-wide instructions are not enough if the source set identifies specific systems, custodians, or deletion settings that require administrative action. - When cloud or collaboration tools are implicated, preservation must address platform settings that can continue deleting or expiring content absent intervention. - If the notice reaches business-use personal devices, the organization must evaluate whether existing BYOD controls can capture or preserve responsive data. **Calendarized obligations** - Any deadline stated as a number of days from notice date, collection date, or receipt date should be converted into a concrete calendar date. - Collection, imaging, and suspension steps should be tracked separately if the notice distinguishes them. **Authority citation convention** - When the source documents identify a rule, policy, or instruction by name, quote the naming convention used there in substance, not verbatim. - If the report refers to a legal or compliance proposition, anchor it to the operative notice language or the governing preservation principle being applied. ## 4. Analytical scaffolds 1. **Enumerate the source documents** - List each notice, supplement, and internal implementation document. - If only one notice exists, state that affirmatively and proceed on that basis. 2. **Control the scope by document** - Derive the controlling period from the full set of documents. - Identify which document supports each boundary and whether any later document expands the scope. 3. **Compile obligations by category** - Separate document categories, technology systems, custodians, device types, and retention settings. - Group obligations by type so legal and IT readers can see what must be preserved, where, and by whom. 4. **Check technical preservation controls** - Identify whether the implementation materials include a platform-level hold or equivalent suspension control. - Flag any default deletion, retention, recycle-bin, or expiry setting that must be disabled or overridden. 5. **Calendar all deadlines** - Translate every deadline into a calendar date. - Distinguish imaging, collection, hold implementation, certification, and follow-up deadlines if they differ. 6. **Assess BYOD and off-system coverage** - Test whether the notice reaches personal devices, home systems, ephemeral messaging, or other non-corporate repositories. - Compare that scope against the implementation plan and identify any coverage gap. 7. **Rank the gaps** - Prioritize by preservation risk, deadline proximity, and difficulty of remediation. - Convert each gap into a specific remedial recommendation with an owner and timing anchor. ## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships (only if applicable) - Preserve the hierarchy between the primary notice and any supplemental letter: later correspondence may broaden categories, extend dates, or add systems. - Keep separate the relationship between legal scope and technical execution: a broad instruction without system-level controls is still incomplete. - Track timing vertically from notice receipt to hold implementation to collection or imaging completion. - If the implementation documents show partial action taken, distinguish completed steps from residual exposure rather than treating the hold as binary. - Where a system depends on an admin console, license tier, or retention policy setting, identify that dependency as the operational bottleneck. ## 6. Output structure conventions - Deliver as a prioritized compliance gap report. - Define one ordinal severity scale at the top and apply it consistently to each gap or recommendation. - Use an industry-conventional, memo-style structure rather than the rubric’s internal checklist language. - Organize the report into concise sections such as: - Executive takeaway - Controlling scope and time period - Preservation categories and systems - Deadline-driven actions - Gap analysis - Recommended remediation - For each gap, include: - severity - what the notice requires - what the implementation materials show - why the shortfall matters - the corrective step - End with a distinct Recommended Actions block that assigns each action to a role or function and ties it to a concrete deadline or urgency marker. - Keep the report operational: the reader should be able to hand it to legal, IT, and records teams without further translation.