Packets needing correction
48/week
Estimated incoming packets that would enter a correction loop.
Scenario inputs
Adjust aggregate pilot assumptions.
The model translates court operations into reviewable signals: how many packets require correction, how much correction handling is visible, how many service/proof exceptions need follow-up, and how often scheduled matters are not packet-ready.
Correction handling visible
17.5hrs/week
Aggregate review time tied to deficiency handling, correction notices, and returned packets.
Pilot capacity target
4.4hrs/week
A testable weekly rework-reduction target for a controlled pilot.
Service / proof exceptions
25/week
Items that should be visible before a scheduled matter reaches review.
Scheduled but not ready
20/week
Matters that need packet-readiness attention before a hearing or review date.
Monthly review signal
18hrs/month
A four-week target to compare against baseline measurements.
What this proves
A pilot can measure movement through work states.
- How many filings require correction before clerk acceptance.
- How quickly corrected packets return to review.
- How many scheduled matters still lack service, proof, or packet readiness.
- Which issue categories cause the most avoidable rework.
- Whether aggregate queue age improves without weakening human review.
What this does not prove
Keep the public claim narrow.
- It does not predict case outcomes or judicial decisions.
- It does not replace court policy, staffing, or local rule review.
- It does not publish case-level or sealed details.
- It does not treat unreviewed automation output as court-ready.
- It does not make a production claim without local configuration.