MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
legalxml-courtfiling message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] Record Docketing and Callbacks
From: "John M. Greacen" <>
To: "'Electronic Court Filing Technical Committeee'" <>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:53:15 -0600
I have reviewed Jim’s list. I believe that it is missing the “hash”
of each of the filed documents. The
hashes need to be part of the asynchronous Record Docketing callback and the
asynchronous Review Filing callback.
I agree with Roger Winters that neither
the filer nor a service recipient needs to receive “changes” made
in the metadata submitted by the filer. As Roger points out, in the paper world,
the docket entry(ies) made by the clerk are not
communicated to the filer. If the
filer is interested, the filer can check the docket. We have a query to do that. But the filer
has no interest in how the clerk’s office characterizes the document on
the docket. If the clerk’s
office finds that the same filer is making a
consistent error in the way in which s/he submits filing metadata, that is a
proper subject for a telephone call or email message from the deputy clerk to
the lawyer’s secretary. But there is no need for that information to be carried back
to the filer in a callback message.
Similarly, the service recipient got the
document(s) submitted for filing. S/he
has no need to know about changes in the metadata made during the docketing
process. Nor does the service recipient
have a need to know the document ID number assigned by the court; s/he already
has the documents themselves and does not need to access the court record to
read them. We have queries to
enable the service recipient to access the document in the court record if s/he
loses or deletes the served documents by mistake or on purpose.
This simplifies the callbacks significantly.
From: Cabral, James E.
[mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 11:23
PM
To: Electronic Court Filing
Technical Committeee
Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling]
Record Docketing and Callbacks
Everyone,
and are currently working on defining the domain
models and GJXDM mappings for the Record Docketing and callbacks. In the
attached email discussion of the content of each message, I identified two
questions for the TC. I referenced the second issue in the "Proposed
Service Model for ECF 3.0" document because it relates to the service
model . But the first issue is a possible simplification of all the callbacks
that I do not recall we have decided as a TC.
Again, please direct your comments to the
entire TC so that we may resolve these issues as soon as possible.
thanks,
James E. Cabral Jr.
MTG Management Consultants, L.L.C.
(206) 442-5010
www.mtgmc.com
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or
privileged material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender
and delete the material from any computer.
From: Cabral,
James E.
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 3:28
PM
To: ''
Cc: ;
Subject: RE: Record Docketing and
Callbacks
Scott,
Here's what I recall, in sequential order:
1. The ReviewFiling synchronous callback
includes
- the time the
filing was received by the Filing Review MDE
- the court-assigned
case number
- any error messages
2. The RecordDocketing includes
- all the metadata
and attached documents in the ReviewFiling message that is accepted
by the clerk, as edited by the clerk
- the court-assigned case
number
- the payment receipt
3. The RecordDocketing synchronous
callback includes
- the time it was
received by the Court Record System
- any error messages
4. The RecordDocketing asynchronous
callback includes
- all the
metadata and attached documents in the RecordDocketing message, as modified by
the Court Record System
- the document
identifiers for each document filed into the Court Record System
- any error messages
5. The ReviewFiling asynchronous callback
includes
- all the
metadata and attached documents in the RecordDocketing message, as edited by
the Court Record System
- the court-assigned
case number
- the disposition
(accepted/rejected) of each document in the original ReviewFiling message
- the document
identifiers for each document filed into the Court Record System
- the payment receipt
(if the court processes payments)
- a place for error
codes
I am unclear on a couple things:
1. One simplification would be to remove
the metadata and documents from the callbacks. In that case, it seems to
me that we would still need to include a way to indicate to the filer what
information the clerk or Court Record System changed. Or should
we just say that it their responsibility to download the documents and check
them for changes?
2. Another question I have is how this all
relates to service. Since the service recipients receive the filing
concurrently with the court, do they need to also receive notification of the
changes the clerk or Court Record System make? And should the
service recipients receive the document identifiers for each
document? Currently, we do not have a mechanism designed to support
that.
That's all I can remember. I
probably missed some but it should be a good start for your strawman.
jim
From: [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 12:04
PM
To: Cabral, James E.
Cc: ;
Subject: Record Docketing and
Callbacks
Jim, do you have an
understanding of existing consensus regarding what should go into the callbacks
and Record Docketing message structure?
Tom and I would like to put a strawman forward to the list on this. Can
you help us build it? My recollection is that we think we need only a few
data items more than what's in Review Filing...
Thanks.
--Scott
References:
Record Docketing and Callbacks
From: "Cabral, James E." <>
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
