Evaluate every Roundup claim uniformly

The settlement sorts claims into nine tiers on three objective criteria, and the facts behind each one rarely sit in one record. Pattern structures them for every case so your team can work the full inventory.

Key capabilities

How Pattern evaluates Roundup claims at scale

Pattern structures the exposure and medical record for every case, applies the settlement's criteria consistently across the inventory, and carries validated data through to submission.

Structure the exposure record

Occupational and residential classification is established from the record. Pattern pulls work history, employment and income records, and residential exposure evidence, then totals hours and lifetime days against the thresholds.

Identify the qualifying diagnosis

Pattern locates every NHL diagnosis and classifies subtype as Aggressive or Indolent, the categorization that feeds tier. Confirmed diagnoses are held apart from suspicion and family history.

Account for adjustments

Tier sets the starting point. Treatment, transplants, and prior conditions adjust a claim from there, and each holds only where the record supports it.

Validated once, carried forward

Once your team validates a case, the structured data moves into the registration and submission work product your firm needs. No second review pass, no re-keying.

What Pattern captures in a Roundup case file

Roundup claims turn on a handful of facts. Pattern pulls the same ones from the source records on every case, so your team reviews the whole inventory on the same terms.

Identity and U.S. Person status

Exposure hours and lifetime days

Occupational capacity and income evidence

NHL subtype and classification

Diagnosis dates and age at diagnosis

Treatment course and transplant history

The platform

The case file

Every case opens on the same view: the eligibility gates, each claim path and its status, and one timeline of exposure, injury and treatment. Reviewers then work it step by step against the criteria.

Open items, scored by severity

Each gap is scored Critical, Major, or Minor and names the record or field needed to close it. A lymphoma subtype not specified. A partial exposure date. A qualifying injury missing its stage.

Every field traced to its source

Each extracted value links back to the page in the record it came from, and can be relinked where the record supports a different read.

Inventory status across the docket

See how the inventory breaks down: how much of it is tiered, and where open items cluster by category and severity. Filter to the population you need by exposure classification, injury subtype, tier, or award path.

Frequently asked questions

What cancers qualify for Roundup settlement claims?

The qualifying diagnosis under the settlement is non-Hodgkin lymphoma, classified as Aggressive or Indolent. That classification is one of the three criteria that set tier, alongside exposure type and age at diagnosis. Diagnoses not on the qualifying list, including Hodgkin lymphoma and multiple myeloma, are non-qualifying.

Identifying the diagnosis is rarely a single-document exercise. Subtype, classification, and diagnosis date are often spread across pathology, hematology, and treating-physician records, and Pattern pulls them into one view with each value linked to the record behind it.

Why does occupational versus residential matter so much?

It separates the top of the tier structure from the bottom, and it turns on documentation rather than on what the claimant remembers. Occupational status requires a qualifying work capacity, a minimum number of exposure hours, and income evidence tied to that work, all of it documentary.

Most Roundup files were built before any of that mattered. Pattern shows which cases carry the occupational record and which do not, and names what each one is missing.

How does Pattern help law firms prioritize which claims to work on first?

Pattern scores every open item in a claim as Critical, Major, or Minor and names the record needed to close it, then aggregates those items across the docket. A review manager can see that a group of cases is held up on occupational income evidence, assign the group, and send each reviewer to the field in question.

That shows which claims are supported by the record today, which are missing evidence the criteria require, and where documentation would let a file be evaluated on what is actually there.

How does Pattern ensure accuracy when extracting medical and exposure data?

AI proposes; your team disposes. Every value Pattern puts forward carries the document, page, and relied-on text behind it, and your reviewer accepts, edits, or rejects each one.

Marking a review step complete records the reviewer's work on that step. It does not assert that the package is complete or that the claim is eligible. Those are separate states, and Pattern keeps them separate.

What happens if settlement criteria or adjustments change?

Settlement criteria are often refined between announcement and the first filed claim. When the terms change, Pattern updates the evaluation logic and applies it across the full inventory, so your team’s review focuses on the cases the change actually affects.

How does Pattern support the Quick-Pay decision?

Quick-Pay is a one-way election. Accepting it closes off every other award under the program, and only some claimants are eligible for it.

Pattern identifies which claimants are eligible, shows the supported evaluation path alongside the Quick-Pay path for each one, and flags the evidence still outstanding on the full-evaluation side. The election stays with your firm and your client.

Request a demo.

See how Pattern works a Roundup case from qualifying diagnosis to open items, using cases like yours.