Screen every Social Media claim on the record

With no settlement criteria yet, claim strength turns on two facts: use of a defendant platform, and an injury that followed or worsened with it. Pattern checks both on every case, so you know which to work up.

Pattern case view for a Social Media claim showing claim strength, a chronology of platform use, and a suggested finding linked to its source record

Key capabilities

How Pattern screens Social Media claims

Pattern sets what each claimant reports beside what the records show, grades every claim on the injuries that count, and surfaces the gaps holding a case back across the full inventory.

Claimed against evidenced

Intake forms tell one version of the claim, and the records may tell another. Pattern sets each claimant's reported platform use and injuries beside what the documents support, so mismatches surface at screening.

Grade the injuries that count

An injury counts when it was diagnosed after first use of a defendant platform, or when the record documents that use made an earlier condition worse. Pattern grades claim strength on the most serious injury that meets that test.

Platform use by defendant

Each defendant platform gets its own record: Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and YouTube, with start and end dates, duration of use, and age at first use. Use that began before 13 and false-age accounts are flagged.

Treatment and risk factors

The case file documents hospitalizations, psychiatric care, therapy, and psychiatric prescriptions with their dates, along with risk factors such as family history of mental illness, illicit drug use, and adverse childhood experiences.

What Pattern captures in a Social Media case

When firms ask what we look at in these cases, it comes down to platform, age, injury, timing, and treatment. Pattern pulls each from the source records on every case, so the whole inventory is reviewed on the same terms.

Defendant platform use and start dates

Eating disorders, self-harm, suicidality

Hospitalization, therapy, and medication

Age at first use, including under 13

Depression, anxiety, and addiction

Prior diagnoses and family history

False-age accounts

Onset after use, or worsened by use

Wrongful death documentation

The platform

Social Media case overview showing claim strength, highest valid injury, injury after first platform use, and platform use by defendant

The case file

Every case opens on the same view: claim strength, the most serious injury that counts, whether it followed first use, and each defendant platform with its start date and the claimant's age at first use.

Issues list for a Social Media case with open items scored Major and resolved items

Open items, scored by severity

Each gap is scored Critical, Major, or Minor and names the record or field needed to close it. A claimed injury the records do not show. A claimed diagnosis date that differs from the record. A diagnosis with no date.

Suggested suicidal ideation finding linked to the highlighted line in the source record

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.

Claim evaluation report showing cases with injury after first use, claim strength, and highest valid injury tier across the inventory

Inventory status across the docket

See where the inventory stands: how many cases show injury after first use, how claim strength spreads, and the highest valid injury tier across the docket.

Frequently asked questions

What is the Social Media addiction litigation?

It is product liability litigation alleging that Meta (Facebook and Instagram), Snap (Snapchat), ByteDance (TikTok), and Google (YouTube) designed their platforms to drive compulsive use by children and adolescents. Federal cases are consolidated in In re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3047, in the Northern District of California. California state cases proceed in JCCP 5255 in Los Angeles.

What injuries are alleged in Social Media claims?

Claims center on mental and behavioral health injuries: social media addiction, depression, anxiety, eating disorders such as anorexia and bulimia, self-harm, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide. Pattern evaluates the full range of mental and behavioral health injuries, not addiction alone.

Timing matters as much as the diagnosis. An injury carries weight when it followed first use of a defendant platform, or when the record shows that use made an earlier condition worse.

What evidence does a Social Media claim need?

Use of at least one defendant platform, a diagnosed mental or behavioral health injury, and a timeline that connects the two. Treatment records, such as hospitalization, psychiatric care, therapy, or prescriptions, document the injury's course. Intake forms and questionnaires are the starting point, but the medical record is what supports the claim.

How do law firms screen Social Media cases?

By checking each claimant's reported platform use and injuries against what the records show, then grading the claim on its most serious injury that counts.

Pattern does that the same way on every case and scores each gap Critical, Major, or Minor. Across the docket, that shows which claims the record already supports and which are held up on a specific record, so a review manager can assign the work.

How do you prove platform use in a Social Media claim?

Most claims start with what the claimant reports on an intake form or questionnaire: which platforms, when use began, and for how long. Medical and other records sometimes document use directly, and sometimes they don't.

Pattern records use by platform, with start and end dates, and keeps claimed use separate from what the records support, so a mismatch shows up at screening.

Why does age at first use matter in Social Media claims?

The allegations center on minors, and use that began before 13 ties directly to claims that platforms let under-age users onto their services. Pattern records age at first use for each defendant platform and flags use before 13, along with accounts opened under a false age.

How are pre-existing mental health conditions handled in Social Media claims?

A diagnosis that predates first use doesn't end the inquiry. It counts when the record documents that platform use made the condition worse.

Pattern places each diagnosis date against first use and captures prior diagnoses, family history of mental illness, and other risk factors, so your team can assess causation case by case.

What documentation is commonly missing in Social Media claims?

Common gaps include a claimed injury with no supporting medical record, a claimed diagnosis date that differs from the record, a diagnosis with no date, and platform use with no start date. Pattern names the record or field needed to close each one, so your team knows what to request before a case moves forward.

Has the Social Media litigation settled?

There is no global settlement of personal injury claims. Individual cases have gone to trial or resolved one by one, and bellwether trials in the MDL and the JCCP continue to shape how claims are evaluated. Settlements with state attorneys general do not resolve individual personal injury claims.

How does Pattern ensure accuracy in Social Media case review?

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. When the criteria change, Pattern updates the lens, its configuration for this litigation, and applies it across the full inventory.

Request a Demo.

Interested in learning more? Fill out the form to request a demo.