The new Pattern is live! Every case now opens with a clear answer on each litigation criterion: what the record establishes, what’s missing or doesn’t qualify and why, and the step that resolves it. Across the docket, reporting shows where every case stands, so your team knows which ones need attention first.
About a year ago, we sat down to plan the next version of Pattern, and everything we wanted to build hinged on a new foundation underneath it. That work is now running in select litigations, with more moving onto it in the coming months.
Pattern has always shown you where your docket stands. James Nix, our CPO and co-founder, explains why the new Pattern also tells you what to do next:
James Nix, CPO & Co-founder, on the next best action for every case
Mass tort dockets never hold still long enough for one case to tell the whole story. Records arrive incomplete and out of order, and the criteria shift as the litigation moves toward resolution. When a global settlement lands, firms typically get 60 to 120 days to work cases up to criteria, and every gap that wasn't found before that window opens gets found inside it.
Pattern has been built for that problem from day one, configured for each litigation and the criteria that decide it. The new Pattern takes that a step further, with a clear action tied to every gap.
Every case opens on an overview of what the litigation's criteria turn on. Within seconds a reviewer can see whether product use is established, how strong it is, and whether anything stands in the way.
Each issue is specific about what it takes to close. If product use is documented but the duration falls short of criteria, the issue says so and points to the records that would extend the timeline. Pattern tracks it until it’s resolved, and the judgment on how to resolve it stays with your team.
James walks through it from the reviewer's side:
What a reviewer sees in the first 10 seconds of a case
Reporting breaks the full inventory down by what needs attention, so decisions about reviewer hours get made before anyone opens a case. A litigation manager can point the team at cases that are already strong, cases with substantial gaps, or cases waiting on records.
When criteria shift, Pattern reapplies the evaluation across the docket. Work already done carries forward, and what changed shows up as something to act on.
Every finding still ties back to its source document and page, and the change history now sits alongside it. When a submission is questioned or a case is revisited months later, the answer is already on the record.
The new Pattern runs across the full lifecycle of a litigation, and each stage builds on the last. In Screen, the priorities are cost, breadth, and speed, so a firm can evaluate a wide inventory early while the litigation is still taking shape. In Develop, the priority is adaptability: every gap is graded and tied to an action, and the evaluation moves when the criteria do. In Settle, the priority is precision, with eligibility and allocation logic applied across the inventory without re-review.
Most of what changed sits underneath the screen. We rebuilt how Pattern stores litigation data and how it extracts information from the record, and the experience above depends on that work.
One finding per fact. A claimant with one B-cell lymphoma has one B-cell lymphoma in Pattern, however many pages mention it, with the strongest evidence attached. A reviewer sees the handful of facts a case turns on and the evidence behind each.
Extraction in sequence. An experienced reviewer confirms the diagnosis, then the diagnosis date, then the stage, carrying what's established into each next question. Once a cancer is documented at stage 2, the only remaining question is whether the record shows a 3 or a 4. Pattern now works the same way, and each narrower step is what makes the findings accurate enough to act on across a mass tort docket.
Human validation built in. Results generally improve as Pattern sees more cases in a litigation, but that learning never runs on its own. Pattern’s nurse reviewers stay in the loop to validate findings and make sure one unusual set of records doesn’t skew results across the docket.
"The mass tort industry deserves tools that are made for mass tort, not made for somebody else and then shoehorned into mass tort."
James Nix, CPO & Co-founder
Almost every conversation with the firms running Pattern includes some version of "this is great, thank you. Can you also..." Settlement allocation started that way, and much of the new Pattern came the same way, from the data model to the workflow. We want every firm that finishes a litigation on Pattern to want the next one there too.
The best way to understand the new Pattern is to see it on a litigation you're working. Request a demo and we'll walk you through it. Already a Pattern client? Reach out to your client success manager to see it on your own docket.
For more on how Pattern approaches the record itself, read why "no" is the hardest answer to get right and what the record says versus what it means.