[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [legalxml-courtfiling-comment] FilingCompletionDate
|
Gary, The definition I provided, “the date on which an
entry in the docket or register of action in the court CMS was completed for a
filing,” is the source definition in the data mapping spreadsheet “ECF-4.0-NIEM2-mapping.xls
file” provided in the model directory of the core spec. This was
the definition provided by the SMEs in defining the requirements for ECF.
In the spreadsheet you can see that this is mapped to the NIEM 2.0 “DocumentEffectiveDate”
element with the definition “the date information in a
document takes effect”. I believe DocumentEffectiveDate and DocumentReceivedDate should
work as you described for the two dates you need. However, if you are
talking about the effective date of the entire filing and not a particular
document, I would think you would use RecordDocketingMessage/nc:DocumentEffectiveDate.
Regarding the definitions, whenever we use a NIEM element we have
decided that the NIEM definition is close enough and have agreed to use the
NIEM definition. Therefore, we cannot change the definition of
DocumentEffectiveDate unless we want to define a new ECF extension element
instead – I doubt that would be the decision of the TC. However FilingCompletionDate is an ECF extension with the
current definition of: “the date on which the review filing process was completed
by transmitting a proposed filing to the court record MDE for filing or by
returning it to the filer as rejected”. I suggest that the TC consider your using your modified
definition of: “the date and time on which the Court Record MDE filing process
was completed following the acceptance by the Filing Review MDE” . If the new definition is accepted by the TCs, it is a
simple matter to update the XSDs in the next maintenance release. Finally, the definitions of elements do not change depending on
the message. However, we can always add language to the core
specification to clarify the intent of a particular element if its usage in a
particular message is not obvious. Jim Cabral Helping
our clients make a difference in the lives of the people they serve. 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: Graham, Gary
[mailto:GGraham@courts.az.gov] Jim, You
are correct that there have been many discussions regarding the official date
of filing, vs the date the filing process was completed. It is not my intention
to re-plow that row. Acceptance
or Rejection of an efiling submission occurs within the Filing Review MDE
(I’ll call this Clerk Review). If the submission is accepted, then a
communication is sent from Clerk Review to the Court Record MDE (I’ll
refer to this as the CMS). This communication (i.e. RecordFiling)
includes the RecordDocketingMessage. The
CMS wants to know the date and time that the submission was accepted in Clerk
Review and record two events into the Register of Actions (ROA). In Arizona,
court rules specify that if a submission is accepted, then the official date
(and time) is the date and time that the submission was received from the
Filing Assembly MDE (these are my words of course since the court rules know
nothing about MDEs). I presume this would come from the CoreFilingMessage
nc:DocumentReceivedDate/nc:DateTime. This date and time would be used for one
of the two ROA events (e.g. the official date and time). The
other ROA event is the “event acknowledging the acceptance of the efiling
transaction (e.g. “efiling accepted”) by the court via clerk
review. The event date would be the “Process Date” – the
date-time at which this transaction was accepted by the court.” You
suggest using nc:DocumentEffectiveDate for this purpose. You say that its
definition is “the date on which an entry in
the docket or register of action in the court CMS was completed for a
filing.” Using XMLSpy and viewing the XSD, I see the definition
“the date information in a document takes
effect.” Is there some other source that I should be looking at
for element definitions? Using
DocumentEffectiveDate to send the date (and time) that clerk review acceptance
occurred should work. I
presume the fully qualified element should be
RecordDocketingMessage/ecf:ReviewedLeadDocument/nc:DocumentEffectiveDate and
not RecordDocketingMessage/nc:DocumentEffectiveDate. As
such, the following example illustrates my understanding. In this example, a
submission is provided by the Filing Assembly MDE on 2-1-2010 at 8:00 AM MST.
It is received by the Filing Assembly MDE one (1) second later. It gets
accepted in Clerk Review the next day (2-2-2010) at 10:00 AM MST which is
communicated to the Court Record MDE using the RecordDocketing message.
Finally, the Court Record MDE completes docketing and returns the
NotifyDocketingCompleteCallback message to the Filing Review MDE indicating
that docketing occurred on 2-3-2010 at 11:30 AM MST: Example: CoreFilingMessage
passed from Filing Assembly MDE to Review Filing MDE: <CoreFilingMessage> …
<nc:DocumentFiledDate>
<nc:DateTime>2010-02-01T08:00:00.000-07:00</nc:DateTime>
</nc:DocumentFiledDate>
<nc:DocumentReceivedDate/> … </CoreFilingMessage> CoreFilingMessage
Receipt Stamped by Filing Review MDE and passed to Clerk Review: <CoreFilingMessage> …
<nc:DocumentFiledDate>
<nc:DateTime>2010-02-01T08:00:00.000-07:00</nc:DateTime>
</nc:DocumentFiledDate>
<nc:DocumentReceivedDate>
<nc:DateTime>2010-02-01T08:00:01.000-07:00</nc:DateTime>
</nc:DocumentReceivedDate> … </CoreFilingMessage> RecordDocketingMessage
sent to Court Record MDE for accepted submission: <RecordDocketingMessage> …
<ecf:ReviewedLeadDocument>
<nc:DocumentEffectiveDate>
<nc:DateTime>2010-02-02T10:00:00.000-07:00</nc:DateTime>
</nc:DocumentEffectiveDate>
</ecf:ReviewedLeadDocument> </RecordDocketingMessage> RecordDocketingCallbackMessage
returned to Filing Review MDE: <RecordDocketingCallbackMessage> …
<nc:FilingCompletionDate>
<nc:DateTime>2010-02-03T11:30:00.000-07:00</nc:DateTime>
</nc:FilingCompletionDate> … </RecordDocketingCallbackMessage> If
the above example is correct, then I believe that the element definitions in
the XSDs may be contributing to confusion. Consider
that the definition of FilingCompletionDate on the RecordDocketingCallback
message should be something like: The date and time on which the Court Record MDE filing process
was completed following the acceptance by the Filing Review MDE” And
not: ‘The
date and time on which the review filing process was completed by transmitting
a proposed filing to the court record MDE for filing or by returning it to the
filer as rejected.’ There
seems to be several problems with the current definition: (1) it’s not
the review filing process that is completed when the RecordDocketingCallback
message is sent, it’s the record docketing process that has been
completed, (2) presumably the date and time is the date and time of the record
docketing process (e.g. entry into the ROA), and (3) the
RecordDocketingCallback message never occurs if the submission is rejected in
the Filing Review MDE. When
DocumentEffectiveDate is used on RecordDocketingMessage, its definition should
perhaps be something like: The date and time that filing review was completed and an
acceptance or rejection determination was made for the document. Can
the definition of a given element vary depending upon the message it is
included in? If
not, is there some other informative source of element-message definitions? Thanks Gary From: Cabral, James E.
[mailto:JCabral@mtgmc.com] Gary, I remember we had quite a few discussions on what dates we need
to track in the course of a filing. I believe we made a distinction
between the official date of filing and the date the filing process was
completed since, in some cases, a clerk may make the official date of filing a
different date than the date it was reviewed/accepted by the clerk and entered
into the case record. I believe the intent was to use
DocumentEffectiveDate for the official date of filing. The definition is
“the date on which an entry in the docket or register of action in the
court CMS was completed for a filing.” That element is present in
both the RecordDocketingMessage and RecordDocketingCallbackMessage. Does this make sense? Thanks, Jim Cabral Helping
our clients make a difference in the lives of the people they serve. 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: Graham, Gary
[mailto:GGraham@courts.az.gov] When
the Filing Review MDE invokes the RecordFiling operation on the Court Record
MDE, acceptance of the submission has already occurred (i.e. see ECF4 3.2.6
RecordFiling ‘If the clerk reviews and accepts the filing, the Filing
Review MDE MUST invoke the RecordFiling operation on the Court Record
MDE.’). The invocation is supposed to include ‘information from the
ReviewFiling operation with any modifications or comments by the clerk.’ However,
the date and time of the filing review completion is not communicated to
RecordFiling. It appears that this information is intended for the
FilingCompletionDate element which is described as ‘The date and time on
which the review filing process was completed by transmitting a proposed filing
to the court record MDE for filing or by returning it to the filer as rejected.’ It
appears that this element has been misapplied to the
RecordDocketingCallbackMessage when it should have been placed onto the
RecordDocketingMessage. It is the RecordDocketingMessage that is transmitted
from the Filing Review MDE when the RecordFiling operation is invoked. The
RecordDocketingCallbackMessage is asynchronously returned in
NotifyDocketingComplete. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]