The platform

NORBU Demand Intelligence™

Know whether the case is ready before the carrier does.

NORBU doesn't just draft the demand. It analyzes the entire case file, identifies weaknesses, verifies damages, surfaces missing documentation and shows your team what should be fixed before the demand leaves the firm.

norbudemand.io / cases / PLD-24-1107 / intelligence

● ANALYSIS COMPLETE

Case

Carter v. Thompson

Motor vehicle · Cobb County, GA · DOL 05·16·24

87

Demand strength

STRONG

Demand readiness

92%

Document completeness

85%

Scores are analytical support for counsel. NORBU does not determine legal value or predict settlement outcomes.

Intelligence categories

Liability Strength91
Causation Strength88
Objective Injury Findings84
Treatment Continuity76
Treatment Gaps62
Diagnostic Support89
Specialist Escalation81
Procedure Severity78
Future Medical Support58
Medical Specials Verification86
Lost Wage Documentation69
Prior Injury / Preexisting Risk74
Missing Documentation65
Contradictions82
Exhibit Completeness85
Demand Readiness92

Category evolution

An AI demand letter generator writes a letter. Demand intelligence reviews the case.

Three approaches to the same deliverable, separated by how much of the file is actually read.

Layer 01

AI demand letter generator

Produces a narrative from summarized inputs.

Layer 02

Demand package automation

Assembles the documents into a package.

Layer 03

Demand intelligence

Analyzes the entire file and reports readiness.

Before You Send™

Fix the case before the carrier finds the weakness.

Every observation is analytical support for attorney review — never legal advice, and never a prediction of outcome.

DEMAND NOT READY

Missing

  • MRI report
  • Final orthopedic note
  • PT discharge summary
  • Outstanding provider bill
  • Wage verification

Demand readiness

73%

5 ISSUES REQUIRE REVIEW

Analytical observations · for attorney review

  • 0123-day treatment gap detected.
  • 02Consider documenting the reason for the interruption in treatment.
  • 03Future care amount lacks supporting documentation.
  • 04Three billing totals do not reconcile with the medical specials summary.
  • 05Orthopedic recommendation referenced in the narrative is not included in the exhibits.

Observations are not legal advice. Counsel decides what to address and what to send.

Intelligence categories

Sixteen dimensions, analyzed on every file.

Each category reports what the record contains and what it lacks, cited to the page it came from.

Liability Strength

How clearly the record documents the mechanism of the incident, the responding narrative, scene evidence and statements available in the file.

Causation Strength

Whether treating providers connect the documented findings to the incident, and where the record leaves that connection implicit.

Objective Injury Findings

Imaging impressions, positive clinical tests and objective examination findings located in the records, with page citations.

Treatment Continuity

The density and sequence of visits from date of loss through discharge, and how consistently treatment was maintained.

Treatment Gaps

Intervals between dates of service that a carrier is likely to raise, surfaced with the exact dates on both sides of the gap.

Diagnostic Support

Which diagnostic studies exist in the file, which are referenced but absent, and how findings are described by the interpreting provider.

Specialist Escalation

Referral chains from primary or urgent care into specialty treatment, including who recommended each escalation.

Procedure Severity

Documented injections, surgical procedures and interventions, with the notes and operative reports supporting each.

Future Medical Support

Whether recommendations for future care are documented by a provider or appear only in narrative form.

Medical Specials Verification

Reconciliation of every billed line item against provider statements, ledgers and the specials summary.

Lost Wage Documentation

Employer verification, pay records and out-of-work notes supporting the wage loss claimed in the demand.

Prior Injury / Preexisting Risk

References in the records to prior treatment of the same body part, so counsel can address it before the carrier does.

Missing Documentation

Records referenced inside other documents that are not present in the uploaded file.

Contradictions

Statements across records that do not agree — differing mechanisms, dates, or symptom onset descriptions.

Exhibit Completeness

Whether every document cited in the demand narrative appears in the indexed exhibit set.

Demand Readiness

A composite view of whether the file supports the demand as currently drafted, for attorney review.

Demand economics

Eight mechanical steps become five.

NORBU isn't replacing attorney judgment. NORBU is eliminating the mechanical work surrounding it.

Traditional workflow

  1. 01Collect records
  2. 02Organize records
  3. 03Read records
  4. 04Build chronology
  5. 05Reconcile bills
  6. 06Draft demand
  7. 07Create exhibits
  8. 08Attorney review

NORBU workflow

  1. 01Upload
  2. 02Analyze
  3. 03Review
  4. 04Approve
  5. 05Export

NORBU isn't replacing attorney judgment. NORBU is eliminating the mechanical work surrounding it.

01

Upload

02

Analyze

03

Review

04

Approve

05

Export

NORBU Demand provides analytical support for counsel. It does not determine legal value, predict settlement outcomes, or provide legal advice. Every observation is presented for attorney review.

Run the review before the demand leaves the firm.

Upload the file. NORBU reports strength, readiness and completeness for your review.