BUG: NODC's are getting generated and the additional info 1 text + add to coversheet info isn't getting retained when non-standard documents that point to documents that have this data are multi-docketed.

[ttlenard]

Describe the Bug A clear and concise description of what the bug is. We had a Court user report that a number of Notice of Docket Changes were generated in all cases except for one case in a consolidated group of cases, even though the clerk did not update any of the information in the filing during QC. After troubleshooting, we found the reason.

In this particular scenario, earlier this month, an external party eFiled a motion to the docket record. After Docket QC'd the motion, they edited the entry and added data in the additional information 1 text box and checked the box for add to cover sheet. This updates the document title and updates the coversheet.

Later in the month, an external party multi-docketed a "Response to" the original motion that was filed and filed it across the group. This is one of those pesky non-standard type documents where the party has to select a document on the docket record that they are responding to. When they did this, they selected the Motion that had the additional info 1 text + Add to coversheet checkbox checked.

The document was eFiled across the group as per normal at this step, but when Docket QC'ed the filings, we ran into issues. When Docket QC'd the filing on all the cases besides the case that the document was filed in, it generated a notice of docket change and the title removed the information that was originally in that "additional info 1" text box.

Basically what is happening is that when parties file a non-standard document that points to another document on the docket record that has the additional info 1 text + the Add to coversheet checkbox checked, this information is NOT coming over in the multi-docketing, causing Notice of Docket changes to occur when they shouldn't be, AND it is generating multiple coversheets for each case that the clerk QC's the document in.

Business Impact/Reason for Severity Medium - multiple unnecessary coversheets getting generated, and confusing Notice of docket change entries on the docket record.

In which environment did you see this bug? Production, Test

Who were you logged in as? External Parties associated with consolidated cases, Docket Clerk

What were you doing when you discovered this bug? (Using the application, demoing, smoke tests, testing other functionality, etc.) Using the system - this was reported to us by a docket clerk

To Reproduce Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Log in as a party that is associated with a consolidated case
2. Click on the consolidated case link from the my cases page and file a document (I used a motion for my test, as this was what was filed in the case that this issue was reported)
3. Submit your filing (be sure to multi-docket)
4. Log in as a docket clerk and navigate to the case(s) that you just filed in
5. QC the motion
6. Go back and Edit the document you just QC'd, be sure to add some text in the additional information 1 Text box, and also check the box to add to coversheet, click save.
7. Next, log back in as the party you were from step 1
8. Navigate back to the case from step 2
9. File a document, and be sure to select "Response"
10. In the which document are you responding to field, select the motion that has the additional info text added
11. Be sure that you select that you want to Multi-docket this filing and submit.
12. Log back in as a docket clerk
13. Navigate back to the case you have been using, and complete the QC - all should be fine
14. Next, navigate over to another case in this consolidated group and QC the Response to document
15. Notice when you are QCing, there isn't any data in the Additional information 1 text box and the add to coversheet text box is unchecked
16. Complete the QC
17. Navigate to the docket record
18. Notice that there is a notice of docket change now on the docket record that indicates a change in the document title, with the original title containing the additional info and the new title missing the information in the additional info text box.
19. If you view the response to document, you'll notice that the coversheet has been updated with the "new" document title that is missing the additional info 1 text.
20. The more documents that you QC, the more coversheets + NODC's get added to the docket record.

Note: This same behavior occurs with other Non-standard documents like Amended, Amendment, Supplement, Supplemental, Repy, etc.

Expected Behavior A clear and concise description of what you expected to happen. NODC's should not be getting generated when QCing non-standard documents point to other documents that have the additional info 1+ add to coversheet check box checked. The Additional info should be "coming over" with the document.

Actual Behavior A clear and concise description of what actually happened. NODC's are getting generated and the additional info 1 text + add to coversheet info isn't getting retained when non-standard documents that point to documents that have this info in them are multi-docketed.

Screenshots If applicable, add screenshots to help explain your problem.

Desktop (please complete the following information):

• OS: [e.g. iOS]
• Browser [e.g. chrome, safari]
• Version [e.g. 22]

Smartphone (please complete the following information):

• Device: [e.g. iPhone6]
• OS: [e.g. iOS8.1]
• Browser [e.g. stock browser, safari]
• Version [e.g. 22]

Cause of Bug, If Known

Process for Logging a Bug:

• Complete the above information
• Add a severity tag (Critical, High Severity, Medium Severity or Low Severity). See below for priority definition.

Severity Definition:

• Critical Defect Blocks entire system's or module’s functionality No workarounds available Testing cannot proceed further without bug being fixed.

• High-severity Defect Affects key functionality of an application There's a workaround, but not obvious or easy App behaves in a way that is strongly different from the one stated in the requirements

• Medium-severity Defect A minor function does not behave in a way stated in the requirements. Workaround is available and easy

• Low-severity Defect Mostly related to an application’s UI Doesn't need a workaround, because it doesn't impact functionality

Definition of Ready for Bugs(Created 10-4-21)

Definition used: A failure or flaw in the system which produces an incorrect or undesired result that deviates from the expected result or behavior. (Note: Expected results are use cases that have been documented in past user stories as acceptance criteria and test cases, and do not include strange behavior unrelated to use cases.)

The following criteria must be met in order for the development team to begin work on the bug.

The bug must:

• Be focused on solving a user problem
• Contain data for all fields in the bug template, so the team can pick it up and begin working immediately

Process: If the unexpected results are new use cases that have been identified, but not yet built, new acceptance criteria and test cases should be captured in a new user story and prioritized by the product owner.

If the Court is not able to reproduce the bug, add the “Unable to reproduce” tag. This will provide visibility into the type of support that may be needed by the Court. In the event that the Court cannot reproduce the bug, the Court will work with Flexion to communicate what type of troubleshooting help may be needed.

Definition of Done (Updated 4-14-21)

Product Owner

• [ ] Bug fix has been validated in the Court's test environment

Engineering

• [ ] Automated test scripts have been written
• [ ] Field level and page level validation errors (front-end and server-side) integrated and functioning
• [ ] Verify that language for docket record for internal users and external users is identical
• [ ] New screens have been added to pa11y scripts
• [ ] All new functionality verified to work with keyboard and macOS voiceover https://www.apple.com/voiceover/info/guide/_1124.html
• [ ] READMEs, other appropriate docs, JSDocs and swagger/APIs fully updated
• [ ] UI should be touch optimized and responsive for external only (functions on supported mobile devices and optimized for screen sizes as required)
• [ ] Interactors should validate entities before calling persistence methods
• [ ] Code refactored for clarity and to remove any known technical debt
• [ ] Deployed to the Court's test environment if prod-like data is required. Otherwise, deployed to any experimental environment for review.

[rachelschneiderman]

Waiting on court feedback to determine how we want QC and editing of multi-docketed docket entries to be handled in the future.