Summary of work done

Sam clarified that the Requests tab is a reliable source for matters in Negotiation or Resolution when records and bills were requested from a provider, received, and the provider is a chiropractor, especially when there are not multiple competing providers.

I added and ran a third correction pass against live Litify using litify_pm__Request__c as a secondary source only for open matters in Negotiation or Resolution. The pass looked at received medical records/bills Requests and only selected a provider when there was exactly one chiropractic facility for the matter.

What shipped

• Live org: LITIFY_ORG
• Object updated: litify_pm__Matter__c
• Field updated: Primary_Treatment_Provider__c
• Source object: litify_pm__Request__c
• Source fields: litify_ext__Facility_Party__c, litify_pm__Request_Type__c, litify_pm__Date_Requested__c, litify_pm__Date_Received__c, Lexitas_Received_By_Legal_Firm__c, Is_Medical_Request__c
• Pull size: 2,592 received medical request rows
• Matters with received records/bills requests reviewed: 423
• Matters with a single received chiropractic records/bills request: 47
• Already matched before write: 18
• Requests-tab updates applied: 18
• Bulk job: 750UV00000mpdi3YAA
• Verification: 18 checked, 18 found, 0 mismatches

What did not ship

I skipped 11 same-family duplicate Account cases. These were cases where the Requests tab did point to a likely family of provider accounts, but the exact Account ID could create avoidable duplicate-account churn. Examples included ExactaCare versus ExactaCare Chiropractic & Injury Rehab, and Downtown Louisville Chiropractic naming variants.

QA and rollback

• Post-write verification confirmed all 18 updated Matters now match the expected Request facility Account.