This is the web form I spoke of that needs a python script to click the submit button. I will programmatically fill in the values for each field, and then we will need to simulate the submit click.
I can convert this to a python script that uses a dictionary for the questions and values, similar to ahsan's script. Is that what you want?
When was the last time you asked for confirmation from David from Vogelzang?
what is the full case type for QA - Sexual Abuse Chowchilla with Flatirons?
Chowchilla - ACTS/DL - Flatirons - Shield Legal
when was the last time you asked about the qa for: QA - Sexual Abuse Chowchilla with Flatirons – Waiting for QA Results QA - Sexual Abuse Chowchilla Levinson – Waiting for QA Results LA Juvenile Hall Abuse TV - ACTS - DL/Flatirons - Shield Legal CA Juvenile Hall Abuse - Miller - Goldwater - Shield Legal
I have a meeting at Noon today to discuss these campaigns.
when was the last time we asked about the ACTS QA results?
I resubmitted the lakin failure using gcp, please let them know that 24-0413 does not have docs but 24-0416 has the docs. https://themedialaboratory.slack.com/archives/C05STQZJ7Q9/p1727949825662449
I split the automation for lakin - lakin to on final send through MPA but for re-triggers it will send through GCP
Rosemead High School Abuse - ACTS - Shield Legal CA Juv Hall Abuse - ACTS - SIL - ACTS Property Damage - ACTS - SIL - ACTS LA Juvenile Hall Abuse TV - ACTS - DL-Flatirons - Shield Legal CA Juv Hall Abuse - ACTS - FYF - Shield Legal Insurance Bad Faith - ACTS - SIL - ACTS CA Juv Hall Abuse - ACTS - DL - Flatirons Chowchilla - ACTS - Levinson (TC) - Shield Legal
create new lr automation to send to dataprocessing@lorecenter.com
lead id: 534182 external id: 246384 docs were not enabled in the automation (I have fixed it) so there were no docs uploaded.
please resubmit a qa test lead for the following campaigns before the 1PM. they will go through gcp, i have verified the lawruler automation will send docs Rosemead High School Abuse - ACTS - Shield Legal CA Juv Hall Abuse - ACTS - SIL - ACTS LA Juvenile Hall Abuse TV - ACTS - DL-Flatirons - Shield Legal Chowchilla - ACTS - Levinson (TC) - Shield Legal
Any update / communication on the ACTS QA?
No. I do need to reach out to Mark tomorrow though. We are going to submit a lead on a Google Meet to determine why certain fields are not coming through on a few campaigns.
Please send me related information and include me in that meeting, since they are currently set to run though GCP
Hello Dustin..., can you hop in a huddle right quick?
CAJuvenileHallAbuse-Miller-Flanagan - https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1m7ldHfEH245cCFyr3rGfbIsGwu2v3NtS?usp=sharing CAJuvenileHallAbuse-Miller-Simmons-Fletcher - https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1D66SiBwXgmph5rZqrGMtzTQA4C4Z_QBV?usp=sharing
Here are those two campaigns I mentioned earlier.
I will continue to reach out to our contacts for QA purposes.
Is there anything else you want me to prioritize?
work with Daniel to make sure all the MPA flows are mapped after that then building mappings for new integrations
FORM INTEGRATIONS COMPLETED:
Paraquat | Caleb | TikTok | Form 3 Maximus | Facebook | Hair Relaxer | FORM | Long | 1 Paraquat | Facebook | Form 5 | Caleb Paraquat | Facebook | Form 5 | Caleb
what do you mean by form integration?
Form Integrations are the Zapier Files that need to be updated for wed based short forms people can submit leads through on social media platforms (i.e., Facebook, TikTok, etc)
FORM INTEGRATIONS REQUIRING MEDIA BUYERS ACTION BEFORE THEY CAN BE COMPLETED:
Bard Powerport | Tiktok | Form 3 | Jack #1586 Bard Powerport | Tiktok | Form 2 | Jack #1585 Bard Powerport | Tiktok | Form 1 | Jack #1584 Paraquat | Form | Logic | 1 #1579
I am assuming I need to install github on my laptop?
The team is practicing what we went over yesterday with the remaining mpa flows that need importing into gcp: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1i4D_i7_kd2NTXV0LzUWuYdGPYff3CNojIIYpAv45es4/edit?gid=0#gid=0
Let me see if I can get Joe to fix my laptop so I can get in on this
I'm going to reach out to Daniel and maybe set up a huddle so I can look over his shoulder.
Maximus and I have set up time tomorrow for the Forms.
What mapping issues is he talking about?
It was sent in an email about a week ago. I believe it is the wording of some of the questioning.
Does this mean we would need to send them a spreadsheet of the questions per campaign?
Typically it’s the other way around, but I can’t remember why this case was different
Make sure to include me on those emails
Make sure those 4 miller campaigns are set for GCP Webhook and send 1 of the missing for each, then let me know
All four exist. Shall I enable these Law Ruler Campaigns and resubmit?
- Verify the GCP Webhook has the documents enabled and the lead ID is the first line of the email body (anything after is fine)
- Enable GCP Webhook
- Disable MPA Webhook
- Wait 2 minutes
- Resubmit 1 of the missing per campaign
- Let me know which you re-submitted so I can check the logs before sending the others
OK. I will kick those off in a few moments.
Miller - Mattar (598946) Heliot Mendez submitted
Miller - Nielsen -580359 Alberia Williams submitted
You skipped steps 2 and 3 for miller - mattar
I am submitting one from each campaign first
https://themedialaboratory.slack.com/archives/C04A8RLMASJ/p1729212961897979
So GCP wasn't triggered for Mendez..., How about Williams for Nielsen?
GCP is currently broken (my fault). working on fixing, it will catch and send them once working
No worries man. I am going to leave GCP enabled in order to avoid MPA picking up the email.
Let me know what you see once you have the GCP issue resolved
598946 - Heliot Mendez - Success - OpportunityId: 67102 580359 - Alberia Williams - Error: Funkyness in LR Automation, fixed. Need retrigger 582298 - Richard Macklin - Error: Funkyness in LR Automation, fixed. Need retrigger 582887 - Johneisha Kemper - Error: Funkyness in LR Automation, fixed. Need retrigger 597918 - Andrea Evelyn Villalobos - Success - OpportunityId: 67103
I am going to go home now. I'll be back online in a couple of hours
[ { "leadid": 582887, "externalid": "67146" }, { "leadid": 582298, "externalid": "67145" }, { "leadid": 580359, "externalid": "67144" } ]
If I may ask..., what was wrong with the LR Campaign set up?
there was a space with a font and font-size before the lead id
SO the other Leads that Mal provided were not in a state of eSigned Final so they wouldn't have automatically kicked off
I will shoot her a Slack message to inform her
Good job on finding the glicthes and correcting them.
Do we want to keep the GCP LR Campaigns enabled for now?
I cc'ed you on an issue that Miller is having. I will look to see if there are corrections needed on our part and if so I will reach out to you to work to get the GCP files updated as well.
I need to go pick up a script for pain right quick. When I get back and the meds kick in, I will hop on it.
All Form Integrations have been completed. Updated the Miller campaigns for Onder. Three fields needed to be updated.
{ "Lead ID": @{outputs('EmailRows')[0]}, "CaseType": @{variables('casetype')}, "Datereceived": @{formatDateTime(variables('retainDate'),'MM-dd-yyyy')}, "MarketingSource": @{variables('marketingsource')}, "Lead First Name": @{outputs('EmailRows')[1]}, "Lead Last Name": @{outputs('EmailRows')[2]}, "CellPhone": @{outputs('EmailRows')[3]}, "Address1": @{outputs('EmailRows')[4]}, "City": @{outputs('EmailRows')[5]}, "State": @{outputs('EmailRows')[6]}, "Zip": @{outputs('EmailRows')[7]}, "date of birth": @{outputs('EmailRows')[8]}, "email": @{outputs('EmailRows')[9]}, "072.124.001 - Are you currently represented by an attorney for this matter?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[10]}, "072.124.002 - What is the name of the affected party?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[11]}, "072.124.003 - Were you placed in a Juvenile Hall in Los Angeles County, CA? (MUST BE YES)": @{outputs('EmailRows')[12]}, "072.124.004 - Were you sexually abused by Staff member or other inmate?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[13]}, "072.124.005 - Did the abuse occur under the age of 18?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[14]}, "072.124.006 - What was the name of the facility that you attended?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[15]}, "072.124.007 - Agent use: Did the abuse happen at one of the listed facilities?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[16]}, "072.124.008 - Your DOB?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[19]}, "072.124.013 - When did the abuse occur?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[18]}, "072.124.012 - How long did you attend?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[25]}, "072.124.009 - What is the name of the abuser?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[26]}, "072.124.010 - Can you describe the abuser?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[21]}, "072.124.011 - If shown a picture of your abuser would you be able to identify them?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[22]}, "072.124.014 - Have you told anyone about the abuse?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[23]}, "072.124.038 - How many abusers were there?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[24]}, "072.124.039 - Abuser 1 Sex": @{outputs('EmailRows')[25]}, "072.124.041 - Abuser 1 Age ": @{outputs('EmailRows')[26]}, "072.124.042 - Abuser 1 Race/Ethnicity": @{outputs('EmailRows')[27]}, "072.124.043 - Abuser 1 Height": @{outputs('EmailRows')[28]}, "072.124.044 - Abuser 1 Weight/Build": @{outputs('EmailRows')[29]}, "072.124.045 - Abuser 1 Hair": @{outputs('EmailRows')[30]}, "072.124.046 - Abuser 1 Eyes": @{outputs('EmailRows')[31]}, "072.124.047 - Abuser 1 Distinguishing Marks ": @{outputs('EmailRows')[32]}, "072.124.048 - Abuser 1 Other Notes": @{outputs('EmailRows')[33]}, "072.124.049 - What was the Abuser 1 role?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[34]}, "072.124.050 - Where did you normally encounter abuser 1?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[35]}, "072.124.051 - Any other information about your abuser you can share?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[36]}, "072.124.052 - Abuser 2 Sex": @{outputs('EmailRows')[37]}, "072.124.053 - Abuser 2 Age": @{outputs('EmailRows')[38]}, "072.124.054 - Abuser 2 Height": @{outputs('EmailRows')[39]}, "072.124.055 - Abuser 2 Race/Ethnicity": @{outputs('EmailRows')[40]}, "072.124.056 - Abuser 2 Hair": @{outputs('EmailRows')[41]}, "072.124.057 - Abuser 2 Weight/Build": @{outputs('EmailRows')[42]}, "072.124.058 - Abuser 2 Distinguishing Marks": @{outputs('EmailRows')[43]}, "072.124.059 - Abuser 2 Eyes": @{outputs('EmailRows')[44]}, "072.124.060 - What was the abuser 2's role at the facility?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[45]}, "072.124.061 - Abuser 2 Other Notes": @{outputs('EmailRows')[46]}, "072.124.062 - Abuser 3 Sex": @{outputs('EmailRows')[47]}, "072.124.063 - Abuser 3 Age": @{outputs('EmailRows')[48]}, "072.124.064 - Abuser 3 Race/Ethnicity": @{outputs('EmailRows')[49]}, "072.124.065 - Abuser 3 Height": @{outputs('EmailRows')[50]}, "072.124.066 - Abuser 3 Weight/Build": @{outputs('EmailRows')[51]}, "072.124.067 - Abuser 3 Hair": @{outputs('EmailRows')[52]}, "072.124.068 - Abuser 3 Distinguishing Marks": @{outputs('EmailRows')[53]}, "072.124.069 - Abuser 3 Eyes": @{outputs('EmailRows')[54]}, "072.124.070 - Abuser 3 Other Notes": @{outputs('EmailRows')[55]}, "072.124.071 - What was the abuser 3's role at the facility?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[56]}, "072.124.024 - How many incidents of abuse were there?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[57]}, "072.124.025 - Please explain, to the best of your ability, the events that occurred": @{outputs('EmailRows')[58]}, "072.124.028 - Did the abuser wear gloves?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[59]}, "072.124.027 - Was there skin-to-skin contact?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[60]}, "072.124.072 - Agent Use: What type of sexual abuse occurred:": @{outputs('EmailRows')[61]}, "072.124.015 - Have you received or have ongoing treatment due to the incident?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[62]}, "072.124.016 - What kind of treatment? (If applicable)": @{outputs('EmailRows')[63]}, "072.124.017 - Did you go by another alias while attending?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[64]}, "072.124.018 - What is the name of your biological mother?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[65]}, "072.124.019 - DOB of your biological mother?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[66]}, "072.124.020 - What is the name of your biological father?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[67]}, "072.124.021 - DOB for your biological father?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[68]}, "072.124.022 - What is the name of your CASA volunteer/ guardian ad litem?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[69]}, "072.124.023 - Are you a member of a Native American Tribe, and if so, which one?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[70]}, "072.124.032 - What is your mailing address?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[71]}, "072.124.029 - Do you have an alternate contact number? (ask for a relationship to the person)": @{outputs('EmailRows')[72]}, "072.124.030 - Is it ok for us to contact this person in the event we can not reach you? (confirm yes)": @{outputs('EmailRows')[73]}, "072.124.031 - Do you give us permission to reference your case to them so they know why we're trying to reach you?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[74]}, "072.124.033 - Is the PNC female?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[75]}, "072.124.035 - Was a report filed for the instances of abuse?": @{outputs('EmailRows')[76]}, "072.124.037 - Relationship to you :": @{outputs('EmailRows')[77]}, "072.124.026 - Approximate age of abuser at the time of incidents": @{outputs('EmailRows')[26]} }
We did the install but we hadn't tested it due to Google Cloud not working
Screen share with Daniel or James and have them walk you through how to do that update.
Good Morning Dustin..., I made the change to main.py
• Performed a git add command • Performed a git commit command • Performed a git push commit Now I am going to github.com to finish the process. Am I good so far?
...Am I at the right spot on Github.com to request your review of my code changes?
You want to click the "Pull Request" tab then find your open pull request. You only create 1 pull request per branch not per commit
He will answer your DM within 10-15 minutes
I sent a message on Friday, about Monday, no response
Let me call him and make sure he's OK. That doesn't sound like Mike at all (unless he's on vacation)
Now that I think about it, if he is..., he'd be in the mountains with no reception.
I have to click Merge Pull Request correct?
Did you see this comment? https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/19#discussion_r1811606495
After you respond to the emails and add the logic for miller declines, do you think you can tackle this task? https://tortintakeprofessionals.monday.com/boards/5053948403/pulses/7696659768
I merged in the Miller campaigns you updated. They have auto-deployed to GCP. You can trigger a test with LawRuler (GCP Webhook) when you want. Let me know when you send the test and I will get you the logs
Let me get some coffee and I will do it now.
Submitted a test for - Test Jack Tester (Miller - Onder)
10 AM is when it will fire off. (every 30 minutes)
Cool. I am going to continue to disable the MPA Campaigns and enable the GCPs.
Here is the external_id from your test: 68998 I can see that the intake pushed but not the docs and it has a status of Signed & DECLINED
Question Dustin..., Can we see the payload that was sent over to Miller - Onder for the test above?
I have the data from LR and the Mapping. I can apply the mapping and give you the payload. Give me a few minutes to make that happen
OK. Raul sent a list of fields that were not populated, but they were properly mapped.
payload is what we sent. intake is what I got from LR
The lead Precious is talking about for miller - simmons. the problem is that LR never triggered the automation to send to GCP. that automation was turned on 10/15 LR bug?
What is the status of the ACTS fields?
I need to finish up my spreadsheet. I will plug away at that this afternoon
Looks like our meeting will be pushed to later. previous meeting in conference room is running very late
I'll probably get some lunch and when we meet..., log back in to the Google Meet
Hey Dustin, I’m gonna need to take me a few moments. I have to change my gauze and it typically causes a lot of stress so when we decide to have the meeting…, Can you shoot me a Slack? I’ll have sound on for notification.
leadid: 556941, externalid: 70500 leadid: 556164, externalid: 70499
10/30 We will talk about sending the drops then can you reply on the thread "Re: CA Camp Abuse Drops & API Mapping".
leadid,externalid 556995,70616 576152,70614
A summary of the leads with a status of eSign Final from yesterday.
Good Morning Dustin..., can we do a huddle at 10:00 AM? We have the new JSON for the LA County Foster Care Abuse - Miller - Goldenfarb - Shield Legal and I wanted to verbally give you a description of the updates I will be making.
https://themedialaboratory.slack.com/archives/C07NKRL6X37/p1728002685568799
Verified: All other Miller campaigns have the correct Marketing Source listed.
Here is an integration that we need to reach out to get their fields/endpoint/key https://tortintakeprofessionals.monday.com/boards/4677317281/pulses/7789759784. @Malissa has a template where we fill out our fields then send them to them asking for them to fill out everything else
Here's the email
```Good Afternoon Joseph, My name is Dwight Thomas, Systems Integration Engineer for Shield-Legal and I have been assigned the task of developing the automation for the "NEC Baby Formula" campaign. I have attached an Excel Spreadsheet highlighting the questions we are currently gathering information from potential leads. Can you fill out all of the corresponding Client information (highlighted in Red) and email it back to me? (This information includes fields, endpoint information, key info, etc.) If you have any questions of me, please feel free to reach out to me and I will get back to you as soon as possible.
Thank you,
Dwight M. Thomas```
If you want an example of some of the code we will be dealing with read through the python in this project: https://github.com/shield-legal/Firefoam_fix
Can you put a summary of that meeting with legafi in Monday?
1677 - CA Juv Hall Abuse - ACTS - SIL - ACTS 1706 - Chowchilla - ACTS - SIL - ACTS 395 - Redlands Abuse - ACTS - Shield Legal (NOT QUEUED) Auto Accidents LSA - ACTS - ACTS - Shield Legal (NOT IN LR) Medical Malpractice - ACTS - SIL - ACTS - Shield Legal (NOT IN LR) School Negligence LSA - ACTS - ACTS - Shield Legal (NOT IN LR) Search for ACTS in https://tortintakeprofessionals.lawruler.com/cases.aspx
Here should be all the files related the ACTS campaigns: https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/commit/5c2f06b8337a1cf77984fa2428b67e07a87a1c6a
Fireflies was not on that meeting. Please add columns for date requested, date completed and populate from Monday
Zoom decided to do an update when I launched
Looks like LegaFi set it up for only to be authorized to get the credentials. Please use the link they sent and copy the credentials
LegaFi Credentials:
username: shieldlegal password: K^&62n#Mi**r2u6x6
The Highlighted field should have default values to map to.
replace firstName with [PL-FIRST-NAME] and so on
It's further down in the json file. I can remove the reference to firstName and lastName
CA Juvenile Hall Abuse - Miller - Kugel - Shield Legal - Test Lead: 643933
Please fille out the rest of the questions in your test lead above then let me know
Are they asking for more than one abuser on his test lead?
yes:
> Dustin,
>
> I have received your test, Most fields are good, however, on the test, abuser 2 and abuser 3 information was not posted, If I could get another test with all fields filled out to ensure every field is operational and do not run into any potential complications down the line when we are getting live leads. Thank you for your time.
Done. I’m changing the status to retrigger and hopefully they should process at the top of the hour.
Can you start on https://tortintakeprofessionals.monday.com/boards/4677317281/pulses/8041193818?
Does the integration require the intake questions to be available during case creation, or can they be included on a separate page afterward?
• If after, I can move the UDFs to a separate page. • If during, I would need to reorganize the existing intake by moving it to a separate page and replacing it with your intake. • If the integration can recognize hidden fields, I wouldn’t need to move anything. I could add the fields in the background and reference them from a different page to avoid mixing the two intakes. The answers to these questions will help determine how the UDFs need to be set up in our system.
The integration does not require the intake questions to be mapped, but LR does not send data from a field that gets marked as internal so it would not populate an SA field. Mapping the Intake questions to your correlating fields provides the most accurate data for the information requested. If the field is not mapped, there is a method to post those fields in a generic "Comments" field.
convert "are they female" to gender include ashwin during qa process send over the missing fields (some may have been duplicate questions) change email from ron and intake to only send SA id add status to data push fix leadid udf add the word test in either first or last name
*Thread Reply:* Did we do all of this?
*Thread Reply:* Is Ryan asking about this? I am not seeing which Zap file has these issues.
This is a sample mapping file for ACTS. Do we need to include the "<!" and "!>" characters in the json file?
{
"Lead ID": "Lead ID",
"Case_Type": "CA Camp Abuse",
"Marketing_Source": "Levinson (MC)",
"Lead First Name": "Contact/Firstname",
"Lead Last Name": "Contact/Lastname",
"CellPhone": "15",
"Address1": "8",
"City": "10",
"State": "11",
"Zip": "12",
"date of birth": "23",
"[PL-EMAIL]": "16",
"<! [CA-UDF**REPPED-BY-OTHER] !>": "C-1506",
"<! [CA-UDF**SPOKE-TO-OTHER] !>": "C-20582",
"<! [CA-UDF**SIGNED-WITH-OTHER] !>": "C-20583",
"<! [PL-NAME] !>": "C-1521",
"<! [CA-UDF**PLACED-IN-JUVI-HALL] !>": "C-1507",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSED-BY-STAFF] !>": "C-1508",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSE-BEFORE-18] !>": "C-1509",
"<! [CA-UDF**JUVI-HALL] !>": "C-2860",
"<! [CA-UDF**FACILITY-NAME] !>": "C-1588",
"<! [CA-UDF**VALID-JUVI-FACILITY] !>": "C-2089",
"<! [PL-DOB] !>": "C-1562",
"<! [CA-UDF**OTHER-JUVI-FACILITY] !>": "C-8362",
"<! [CA-UDF**OTHER-JUVI-FACILITY-NAME] !>": "C-8363",
"<! [CA-UDF**SIGNED-W-ATTORNEY-FOR-OTHER-ABUSE] !>": "C-8364",
"<! [INC-DATE] !>": "C-1512",
"<! [CA-UDF**TIME-ATTENDED-JUVI] !>": "C-1511",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-NAME] !>": "C-1510",
"<! [CA-UDF**RECOGNIZE-ABUSER-NAME] !>": "C-8711",
"<! [CA-UDF**RECOGNIZE-ABUSER-PHOTO] !>": "C-1746",
"<! [CA-UDF**TOLD-ANYONE-ABUSE] !>": "C-1513",
"<! [CA-UDF**NUM-ABUSERS] !>": "C-9446",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-SEX] !>": "C-4940",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-AGE] !>": "C-4941",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-RACE] !>": "C-4942",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-HEIGHT] !>": "C-4943",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-WEIGHT] !>": "C-4944",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-HAIR] !>": "C-4945",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-EYES] !>": "C-4946",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-MARKS] !>": "C-4947",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-NOTES] !>": "C-4948",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-ROLE] !>": "C-1559",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-ENCOUNTER] !>": "C-1560",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER-OTHER-INFO] !>": "C-1561",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER2-SEX] !>": "C-9447",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER2-AGE] !>": "C-9448",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER2-HEIGHT] !>": "C-9450",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER2-RACE] !>": "C-9449",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER2-HAIR] !>": "C-9452",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER2-WEIGHT] !>": "C-9451",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER2-MARKS] !>": "C-9454",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER2-EYES] !>": "C-9453",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER2-ROLE] !>": "C-9456",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER2-NOTES] !>": "C-9455",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER3-SEX] !>": "C-9457",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER3-AGE] !>": "C-9458",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER3-RACE] !>": "C-9459",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER3-HEIGHT] !>": "C-9460",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER3-WEIGHT] !>": "C-9461",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER3-HAIR] !>": "C-9462",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER3-MARKS] !>": "C-9555",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER3-EYES] !>": "C-9554",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER3-NOTES] !>": "C-9520",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSER3-ROLE] !>": "C-9521",
"<! [CA-UDF**NUM-ABUSE-INCIDENTS] !>": "C-1556",
"<! [INC-FACTS] !>": "C-717",
"<! [CA-UDF**GLOVES-WORN] !>": "C-12014",
"<! [CA-UDF**SKIN-2-SKIN] !>": "C-12015",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSE-REPORT-FILED] !>": "C-20571",
"<! [CA-UDF**SEX-ABUSE-TYPE] !>": "C-2990",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSE-TREATED] !>": "C-1514",
"<! [CA-UDF**ABUSE-TREATMENT] !>": "C-1515"
}
Case Type IDs:
CA Juvenile Hall Abuse: CA Camp Abuse Chowchilla: Sexual Abuse Chowchilla LA County Foster Care Abuse: Sexual Abuse LA County
Banafshe automation had styling and failed
You should always include the id when emailing about a test
Yes. However Ashwin and I were communicating while after I sent the email.
How can I go about seeing the payload that we are sending over to ACTS?
you have to build it from the intake.json in GCS and the mapping file
Are you still using the Financial Reporting account
For Law Ruler..., no. I am using my account.
did you setup any automated reports under that account?
The short names are what we need to use
UN: ISL UN: pass
You can access the UDF's by going to Admin UDF Editor You can change your password by going to the Top Right and hovering over the account name You can search for cases using the Top Search or Case Browse
some things did populate but for some reason do not show up:
Dang it..., I just saw this. I will revert to the old Mapping.json file in a few
Yes. Quite impressive on the discovery. How were you able to determine that active status?
I reverted the Mapping.json file back to the state it was in when we ran the test at 4:30 yesterday.
I have submitted a test lead and will check out the results at the top of the hour.
working remote or vacation today & tomorrow?
I just saw that your request for the SA - ACTS meeting was sent on the thread with LegaFi, which probably confused them. Please double check which threads / firms you are emailing before sending an email
Damn it..., I clicked on the wrong email to reply.
Please review this PR when you get a chance: https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/81
Run the following command in Terminal: winget install PostgreSQL.pgAdmin
Spam ESC when the Admin permissions popup appears
import requests import json
url = "https://tca-etl-prod.herokuapp.com/auth"
payload = json.dumps({ "username": "shieldlegal", "password": "K^&62n#Mi**r2u6x6" }) headers = { 'Content-Type': 'application/json' }
response = requests.request("POST", url, headers=headers, data=payload)
tempBearer = "Bearer " + response.text
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
url = "https://tca-etl-prod.herokuapp.com/signedcase"
payload = json.dumps({ "firstName": "Test", "lastName": "Lead", "email": "john.doe@example.com", "campaign": "Product Liability Campaign", "account": "6a2a9d3e-663b-4d91-955d-44b220799531", "callCenter": "Call Center A", "sourceId": "SRC123456", "source": "Facebook", "campaignId": "CMP789123", "facebookCampaignId": "FB001234567", "totalContactPoints": 5, "entryCreated": "2024-11-18T10:00:00Z", "firstCallDate": "2024-11-17T14:30:00Z", "retainerAgreementSentDate": "2024-11-17T15:00:00Z", "retainerAgreementApprovedDate": "2024-11-18T08:00:00Z", "retainerAgreementSignedDate": "2024-11-18T09:00:00Z", "turnedDownDate": None, "turnedDownReason": None, "turnedDownDetail": None, "Status": None, "test": False, "createdAt": "2024-11-18T10:00:00Z", "updatedAt": "2024-11-18T10:00:00Z" }) headers = { 'Content-Type': 'application/json', 'Authorization': tempBearer }
response = requests.request("POST", url, headers=headers, data=payload)
print(response.text)
we should try adding "caseGroup": "Sexual Abuse" to the mapping file
ACTS does not have access to our contact id. You need to give them Name or from our log database External ID (which is their SA ID).
I also do not see a test for acts in the database since 1/1
Then after it runs we need to ask them about the specific external id that gets returned to us
It did not trigger. BQ url was changed, I have fixed. Please retrigger that lead
What does the timeline show in SA for the ACTS lead?
How does this sound to you:
Good Morning,
I have spoke to a few of our staff members who have had similar issues with Smart Advocate (SA) posting and it was determined that this may be a configuration issue in SA. There is a "Enable" switch in the configuration that allows the data to be passed to SA.
Can someone reach out to Rahul and confirm this to be true.
I asked Ahsan to send that to me..., once I get it. I will attach and send it.
GCP Internal only: 10.40.160.3 GCP Public: 34.125.228.252 Port: 5432
integrations-looker i]8$5**zykEU`aYPK
Hello Dustin can we copy the table into gcpintegrationspostgres? It was copied to gcp_integrations
You should be able to join between bq datasets
why do the find in intake_1877 end with _fv ?
also those were pushed onto the ACTS branch not the legafi branch
FileVine files. those changes were not meant to be pushed.
casetypeid IN (1871, 1874, 1875,1846,1845,1872)
How does this look (trying to get the token value):
```from base64 import b64encode
import functions_framework import requests import http.client import json
from flask import Request
from gcputils import functionmapping
conn = http.client.HTTPSConnection("fms.elglaw.com") payload = '' headers = { 'Content-Type': 'application/json', 'Authorization': 'Basic U2hpZWxkTGVnYWxfQVBJOnJjankuVGtBITl5ZV9IUjQ2ISpr' } conn.request("POST", "/fmi/data/v1/databases/ELGFMPStage/sessions", payload, headers) res = conn.getresponse() data = res.json()["token"] token = "Bearer " + print(data) print(token)```
instead of using conn use the requests library
token=<a href="http://requests.post">requests.post</a>('<https://fms.elglaw.com/fmi/data/v1/databases/ELGFMPStage/sessions>', data=payload, headers=headers).json()['token']
You did not push your latest changes for bowersox
I thought I hit the push and commit button…,
And because I left my laptop at work, I have to push it tomorrow. Soon as I’m done with the VA I’ll be in the office.
I’m working a bit later tonight. The “send documents” API Call uses the exact same as URI as the send intake. It’s just the mapping.json that differs.
> We must have it pass through as a field "ie consent 1, consent 2, consent 3 and a "Yes" must be passed on.
So I am knocking these out as they inform me that they have a new FI ready.
attachment_responses = []
for name, content in attachments: ...
attachment_responses.append([name, response.__str__(), response.text])
responses_json = json.dumps(attachment_responses)
postgres.update_lead_intake_document_response(intake['Lead ID'], responses_json)
put data['fieldData']['Payload'] = json.dumps(data['fieldData']['Payload']) before the intake_reponse = requests.post
Hello Dustin. Call you reach out to Maximus? He hit me up this morning about a Form Integration that needed immediate attention. Of course he didn't provide me with the s1 value and I need it to complete it.
I slacked him and I am getting no response.
Here is his email you can try: Maximus Lynn <maximus@themedialab.agency>
I saw your comments in git hub. I will update this later.
Wanted to update you:
Bowersox: Ran successfully and awaiting QA results from ELG ACTS: Awaiting confirmation from Ashwin on the Incident State LegalFi: Heroku API - Ran Sussessful FileVine API - Completing Python modifications and will be ready to test tomorrow. Hope to set to QA by COB tomorrow Form Integrations: Completed and Published an LA Wildfire Form Integration for Maximus (Note) An update was needed for the Leadspedia app in order to correctly retrieve the mapping information.
Is there any other info or task you need me to do?
Ebony Thompson | NEC Baby Formula - DL - Flatirons - Shield Legal | Contact Attempted Created: Jan 31, 2025 1:42 PM Lead # 676552
import hashlib
apiHash = hashlib.md5(str2hash.encode()).hexdigest()
from datetime import datetime, timezone, timedelta
datetime.now(tz=timezone(timedelta(hours=-7)))
-
from datetime import datetime, UTC
datetime.now(UTC)
So tell me what you think about this modification to the mail.py file
A good start. Need to finish the mapping for filevine, we can put it in the mapping file. Also need to add the postgres database logging.
For the postgres logging reference Depo Napoli https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/blob/main/intake_1855/main.py Specifically where I helped Daniel simplify the code: https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/commit/6a973051325bd30b2e9540d6102d0afcbee8cda5
Got sent this request this morning. Since Maximus doesn't like to send emails, I'll send you a screen shot of his request when I get them.
I am about to submit a test lead for LegaFi
Did you see my message at 6PM yesterday?
Once completed, I will be on my way into the office. Our Inspection is completed
By the way…, do we still have our guests from flat irons and Dechello in office today?
OK. Then I’ll stick to a regular polo and not get more fancy. I made the changes based on what I saw from Daniel’s main.py script.
When I get in the office if there’s any changes or updates needed…, Let’s set aside like five minutes so I can pick your brain.
I’m available (in office) basically anytime after…, Let’s just say 11:30 to be on the safe side.
The chat history related to this issue
Sounds to me like the S1 value that was given for those sappy years are not matching up with what law ruler is expecting. I’ll address that immediately upon coming in.
Did we send the 3 prod leads to acts?
Not yet. I can now. I just got the sign off from Bowersox
Please accept the ACTS meeting on monday
Am I good to merge AFFF bowersox into prod?
Mind if I clean up some of the formatting first?
...meanwhile I will clean up the issues with LegaFi
Here is the changes I made. Please review and approve: https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/95/commits/2f34fba1edcadfc8c4f11b2128859378fec7bd67
I submitted a review but it won't allow me to approve the change.
The person that made the PR cannot approve. I just wanted a written confirmation that you approved and understand the changes before I merge that PR
Don't forget to make the list of case types we can and cannot work on based on case type and the mapping excel file for ACTS
We are good with the remaining ACTS campaigns. I am setting up the mapping.json files for them now.
I think so? I will be in, in about an hour
OK. I will be setting up the intakes in Python in the meantime
Here are the mappings and campaigns we sent ACTS on Nov 27. They only gave us the mappings for the first 7. I see multiple case types that are not the same as those first 7 which means we will need their mappings for them
Here is the list I made during the beginning of that meeting: still need mappings for: Auto Accidents - ACTS - SIL - ACTS Birth Injury - ACTS - ACTS - Shield Legal Construction Defect - ACTS - SIL - ACTS Insurance Bad Faith - ACTS - SIL - ACTS Medical Malpractice - ACTS - SIL - ACTS Personal Injury - ACTS - SIL - ACTS Property Damage - ACTS - SIL - ACTS Rosemead High School Abuse - ACTS - Shield Legal School Negligence - ACTS - SIL - ACTS Birth Injury - ACTS - SIL - ACTS LA Juvenile Hall Abuse TV - ACTS - DL/Flatirons - Shield Legal We should compare what is currently in GCP and what is not. Some of those were marked as complete in MPA, so we should be fine to use that mapping but I want to double check just in case
There is some weirdness in your new PR since it was built from the previous one. Please make the fixes mentioned above on the old PR so it can be merged in. I can help with making the new PR be based off of main instead of the old PR
BigQuery is updated to allow testing for those case types
for https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/73 1875 still needs fixing and NEC is still in your ACTS PR
And for LegaFi can you upload any docs they have given you to Monday?
Did you ask for the questions on the INT tab of the questionnaire for LegaFi?
LegalFi heroku does have a document endpoint but filevine does. It will take 2 APIs to upload the doc and another to assign it to the case: https://filevine.stoplight.io/docs/v2-us/c5009ec0c1d04-create-document-url-for-upload
add:
if not exists(cf):
print(f'{cf} not found')
continue
Right after Line 62 in tools/deploy_all.py
Add from os.path import exists at the top
b'{"message":"Something broke!","error":"Error: Unhandled"}'
Heroku: <Response [400]> {"message":"Invalid request: Missing or empty required fields."}
FileVine Contact:<Response [200]> ...
*Thread Reply:* OK I’ll log on to my other laptop and dig a little deeper tonight
Do you have an email thread with a subject of "Nations Law Firm - API set-up for AFFF" from Oct of 2023?
Let me do a search on my phone…, If that does not work, I will do a search when I get back to my desk. Just ordering some lunch now.
In an email to Anthony on Jan 7 with a subject of "Default Field for Payload" you had "callCenter": "Tort Intake"
Good Morning, Dwight,
I am working on getting this information for you.
Account is usually just the name of the law firm, when applicable. In your case, "Shield Legal" is fine. campaignId is our unique identifier for the campaign. I think these are the campaigns Shield Legal is working with. Let me know if we need to find others. • NEC Baby Formula = campaign ID 6461745000002065196 • APAP/Tylenol = Campaign ID 6461745000002065141 status should be one of: • Open - (Lead Exists) • Working - (Currently Being Contacted, no Retainer Agreement sent yet) • Turned Down - (Lead Turned Down) • Retainer Agreement Sent - (Retainer Agreement Sent) • Retainer Agreement Signed - (Retainer Agreement Signed) • Retainer Agreement Approved - (Signature Approved) turnedDownReason should be one of: • Unable To Contact • Does Not Meet Criteria • Does Not Wish to Continue • Already Represented • Bad Lead facebookCampaignId only applies if there is a Facebook ad and the lead comes from that. If it does, it should be included in the lead. If not, ignore it.
Good Morning, I submitted the Laba Forman Test Lead. Our inspection is ending and I will be heding in.
This is what James made a few weeks ago: https://lookerstudio.google.com/reporting/f02d908b-3ff7-458c-9204-9e0ce4a0db14/page/JIGfE
L200 of LegaFi, print(response, response.text)
There is no attachment on your email to ACTS
python .\tools\run_local.py 1877 451044
{'DocumentId': {'Native': None, 'Partner': '688095-Test Tested-IntakeForm.pdf'}, 'FolderId': {'Native': 146976752, 'Partner': None}, 'ProjectId': {'Native': 13338160, 'Partner': None}, 'UploaderId': {'Native': None, 'Partner': 'Shield Legal'}, 'Hashtags': [''], 'Links': {}, 'Filename': '688095-Test Tested-IntakeForm.pdf', 'FolderName': None, 'Size': 68719, 'CurrentVersion': '1.0', 'UploadDate': '2025-02-24T18:39:40.599Z', 'UploaderFullname': 'Shield Legal'}
<mailto:support+id7D3RDG-1LG0X@filevine-api.zendesk.com|support+id7D3RDG-1LG0X@filevine-api.zendesk.com>
the first link in step does not work but the second is what we are using
Line 26 & 27 of 1879/mapping.json & 1880/mapping.json has a problem (extra >)
Hey Dustin…, 1877, 1879 and 1880 are not kicking off.
I’m looking into the logs now to see what I can find
I see the last email for 1877 triggered at 6:30
Can I get an answer to if all the campaigns in PR #73 (https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/73) have been approved by ACTS (QA approved)?
I swear I don't know about these dudes at ACTS
Our "Source" updates match what Ashwin sent
I will send new test leads for the remaining three campaigns.
I am updating the mapping files, but AT ANY POINT IN TIME DO YOU REMEMBER ACTS STATING THAT THE REFFERAL SOURCE SHOULD BE ASSIGNED TO "referralFirm"?
...and excuse me for the CAPS, but this should have been mentioned MONTHS ago.
I have made the updates and resubmitted the leads.
*Thread Reply:* Your email to acts did not include sa id's for him to check. Can we get those sent over?
I will merge in the large pr after lunch
I am going to check the statuses in 10 minutes; I need some water since Tequila can't be taken until 5
By chance, did you see Lawrence's email? He signed off on our test lead.
Just need ACTS approval before I can merge in the 3 in your second PR. What about the mapping for LA Wildfire campaign?
Please verify that the campaigns casetypeid in (363, 1670, 1677, 1686, 1766, 1867, 1768, 1829, 1845, 1846, 1871, 1872, 1874, 1875) have their automation set to trigger on e-sign final and that @Mark Maniora updated his email automation that triggers on final to what it needs to be (cannot recall off the top of my head)
Next time you are working on the ACTS 1779 / 1880 / 1909 please do the following command: git reset --hard to pull in the changes from merging in the other ACTS campaigns.
*Thread Reply:* Also please double check that the changes in the PR are using the correct mappings, I tried to make sure when I was updating the branch but it never hurts for more eyes to look. https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/118/files
*Thread Reply:* Checked and 363 was the only campaign that needed e-Sign Final added.
The attached image is of the 595 mapping.json from your big ACTS PR. It looks like we overwrote the birth injury mapping with a sex abuse mapping, please create a new branch from main and fix it then a new PR.
Corrected 595. Before I submit a Pull Request I will double check everything. Expect the Pull Request Later tonight or in the Morning.
Good morning Dustin,
I am loading up my truck and I was wondering if Daniel has the ability to submit the pull request? If not, when I am finished, I will submit a pull request for 595
The whole team has the ability to create a pull request.
We do not see a branch with your mapping changes for 595
All right if you can give me about half an hour I will log back in to make sure that I push them and I will do the pool request myself. Sorry about that and thank you and Daniel for looking into it.
I just stepped back to my laptop and it’s still turning…, Are you seeing the pull request?
Would you like for me to connect through a huddle for this meeting?
It sounds like you had a hard day yesterday dealing with Flatirons
I have merged LegaFi. Please add "Signed e-Sign FINAL" to the email automation. Do we need to do a backfill?
Dont we already have the mappings for ACTS Chowchilla?
How far did you get with the AFFF ELG campaigns?
Created the mapping.json files for VAM and VAM 2…, (manually creating the questions and csv files) as well as cross-referenced the Law Ruler Intake questions to confirm that the data is mapped properly.
I will create a pull request tomorrow morning and create test leads to see if the data is being properly mapped and pushed.
@Daniel Schussler may have created the test leads for you
your afff branch is the same you used for wood pellets, so it has acts / wood pellets and afff
try git pull --ff-only on that branch. if it fails let me know
git reset --hard origin/Clean_Branch_03052025
Please remember to include id's when asking about firm validate data. Also we did not ask about Daniel's test.
There are 3 id's. The external id is the wrong one.
Please pull all 3 id's from the intake logs
We cannot do a backfill or merge for ELG until the urls are changed back to production (remove the staging)
...yes that was part of the backfill process.
YEah I wouldn't begin this process until you were here.
• first row is a test, lets remove it • remove storageurl and any column that starts with secondary • is this all 3 case types? • change the format for intakeprocessedat to match attached image • pull PII (name, email, phone) based on leadid
• first row is a test, lets remove it - OK • remove storageurl and any column that starts with secondary - OK • is this all 3 case types? YES • change the format for intakeprocessedat to match attached image - OK • pull PII (name, email, phone) based on leadid - OK, (let me confirm where Big Query provides this info).
you can get it from lrdata.contact by contactid if you use the contactid otherwise you would get the contactid from lrdata.lead by leadid then get from lr_data.contact by contactid
no, in the Tort Intake Professionals project
Select b.**, a.** from (SELECT contact_id,
lead_id,
case_type_id,
storage_url,
external_id,
intake_processed_at,
intake_response,
intake_document_response,
intake_status
FROM integrations-tip.gcp_integrations_postgres.lead_data_view
WHERE case_type_id IN (1950, 1946)) a
inner join
(select fullname, primaryemail, homephone FROM <a href="http://tort-intake-professionals.lr">tort-intake-professionals.lr</a>_data.contact) b
on a.contact_id = b.id
ORDER BY intake_processed_at
DESC LIMIT 1000
This should work..., am I missing something?
• missing column name or ** for a. and b.
• joining tables between projects (not always a problem)
• not selecting id from b but using it for join
Try the following query (I forgot about the Integrations dataset in tort-intake-professionals project): SELECT ** FROM tort-intake-professionals.Integrations.integration_log_with_names WHERE case_type_id IN (1950, 1876, 1946) AND intake_response LIKE '%Error%'
Troy hasn't responded to me relating to the duplicate leads list I sent. I wanted to mark these campaigns as done but wanted your input on if I should hold up.
I already marked them as done. We need to bug ACTS again since we have not heard
OK. I know Mal sent an email yesterday afternoon, but I will reach out now myself.
Also, I have been working on the Coursera course; do we need to download JupyterLab and Jupyter Notebooks?
Not for the first module. We should be able to use vscode or google collab (like jupyter notebooks). I believe jupyterlab is a website that hosts jupyter notebooks.
Which is what I was thinking but wanted verification
Hello Dustin is there an issue with intake_1945 (Lead ID:673493)? I am not finding this lead in any of the logs.
You dont have a pull request for that campaign open. Without a pull request the automation does not trigger to push the code to GCP
I thought I did the other day..., give me a moment.
I am going to submit this lead and then send Ashwin an email to answer our question on LA Wildfire as well as provide an SA ID for this.
https://themedialaboratory.slack.com/archives/D07TTPPCBRU/p1741121842771029 https://github.com/shield-legal/lawruler-ui/blob/main/build_questionaire.py - Is the main file but you will also have to look at the code in the oldfunclr_chrome folder
FYI for next time: I would have just told legafi that the backfill is complete.
...yeah I was going to let him know that both the eSigned Final and Sign and Declined are backfilled.
Examples of tkinter (python ui): • https://github.com/dustinsurwill/file_scanner • https://github.com/dustinsurwill/file_copier
Yes. I had mentioned that either last week in our meeting or Monday. This is the day Nick and I were working remotely; unfortunately he didn’t make it back in town.
I am finishing up the stripping of CaseType CaseStatus IDs as we speak.
UPDATE: so I have set up the UI to parse out the case, type IDs and case status IDs into separate list. Do we want to pass the IDs in a list or individually?
We want the selected ids to pass to the reports.py function to get the report. See the changes to reports.py in Ahsan's branch: https://github.com/shield-legal/lawruler-ui/pull/4/files#diff-287a3111fac5ba8208f9b80b2cb47ef0bec3ce0abff9e1ffe20d97473e1350be
def report_pii_answers(case_types: Iterable[int], status_ids: Iterable[int] = (3042, 1075, 1073, 3063), include_ids: bool = True):
reportpiianswers(SelectedCaseTypes,SelectedCaseStatuses)
I need to figure out the Button Updates but I would like to test this process after lunch.
Instant Soup Cup Child Burns - Gomez - Gomez - Shield Legal (So do we have an email stating who the Point of Contact is at Gomez and Gomez?)
I see this is critical and I feel I can have this ready to test by tomorrow if I can confirm the Intake fields.
@Daniel Schussler is currently working on that, and @Zekarias Haile is working on Bard Powerport BCL Simmons.
File "C:\Users\Dwight Thomas\gcp-code\lawruler-ui\.venv\Lib\site-packages\pg8000\core.py", line 386, in __init__
raise context.error
pg8000.exceptions.DatabaseError: {'S': 'FATAL', 'V': 'FATAL', 'C': '28000', 'M': 'Cloud SQL IAM user authentication failed for user "<a href="mailto:dsurwill@shield-legal.com">dsurwill@shield-legal.com</a>"', 'F': 'auth.c', 'L': '351', 'R': 'auth_failed'}
10 seconds have passed
Is there a credentialling issue for the reports?
Oh I see..., it used your credentials even though I was running the script
it is the cause, do you know where to fix it?
I'm checking now..., if I can't find it, I'll DM you. I need to not only be able to diagnose these but solve them.
That is why i asked instead of offering a solution
OK..., I needed to change the email in the reports.py scxript.
Now I need to select casetypes and statuses that will generate a report.
OK so I ran the test and it appears to be running properly, but where can we find the reports that we created?
Should be the root of the project. Output_[casetypeid].csv If you look at ahsans branch he added a part in reports.py that will return the data instead of saving to a file. We want to save it to a file but maybe ask the user where to save it and with what name
If you want to do the Paraquat LegaFi campaign, please assign it to you and reach out for the mapping fields.
Otherwise, I can have @Daniel Schussler start it tomorrow afternoon
I can do it, i’m at a stage now where I’m passing status IDs as well as case type IDs to the report.py script. So I think I’m actually at the testing stage for that process and once the testing has been confirmed I need to figure out the button actions I’d like to think that we can get that done by tomorrow and then Monday I can start on the Paraquat.
We should reach out tomorrow so we can have the fields sometime Monday
I will definitely do that first thing in the morning
I see the branch here: https://github.com/shield-legal/lawruler-ui/tree/Report-Generation-GUI-Creation But only @Ahsan's pull request here: https://github.com/shield-legal/lawruler-ui/pulls
we need to change the reports.py output from csv to excel
Add add a order by casetypeid to the answers query
When you get an opportunity to test this..., could you please?
Good morning Dustin…,
I got up this morning and started preparing for the Paraquat LegaFi campaign. And in generating the LR questions files I got this error and I’m not quite sure why. Well, I understand why, but with the debate on whether a big query should be involved in this process as me somewhat confused.
ImportError: cannot import name 'bigquery' from 'google.cloud' (unknown location)
You do not have bq library installed or activated. It is possible that it is just vs code being weird. Run ./venv/Scripts/activate.ps1 in the vscode terminal before running the dumplrquestions tool
When you go back to working on the gui (should have a different name, such as lrdatabasereports...) please incorperate the following change in reports.py as well as the ones from yesterday. If you wish I can send you the edited file:
UPDATE: Paraquat - LegaFi (Beginning the Field Mapping Process; expect to be testing by Friday Morning)
LR Database Reports GUI: Changed the Name of the Executable and currently compiling the exe as well speak.
From: @Malissa: Dont work on Paraquat - LegaFi
FutureWarning: Starting with pandas version 3.0 all arguments of to_excel except for the argument 'excel_writer' will be keyword-only.
Before your next commit, push and compile of the program please hit CTRL + ALT + L in Pycharm with that file open to optimize the imports (also reduce the exe size). It also helps the file follow PEP8 (the python style guide baseline)
replace --enable-plugin=tk-inter on L8 of lrdatabasereports.py with --windows-console-mode=attach to hide the console window (https://nuitka.net/user-documentation/user-manual.html#windows-console-window-control)
Did you login to SA to see if you can see any issues on those leads?
No..., and I should, but that's an absolutely horrible email to describe an issue.
Add , stdin=PIPE, stderr=PIPE after shell=True on line 33 of common/cloudpostgres.py
Failed to overwrite in user set directory
No, it was a runtime error. the output###.csv did not overwrite the output###.xlsx in my documents folder
So we need to set an overwrite option to true...
is that a library i need to install before compile?
It is imported in through
import pandas as pd
We Have Success..., I will run the remaining 4 leads
Let's get acts Wildfires mapped and test sent tomorrow
Absolutely!!! it’ll be my priority tomorrow.
version with putting the templates together
git reset --hard origin/Remaining-ACTS-Tasks
https://realpython.com/async-io-python/
Test Lead for Gaming Addiction - Meadow Law/Levinson/TC (TIP) - Shield Legal: 716328
Do we need to add the 3 Incident_Facts to 1879 / 1880 / 1909?
There are changes to the mapping for 1845 in the 1945 PR, reasons why?
Double check that the webhook is created and setup then ask @Mark Maniora to turn off the final emails for the following campaigns: • Chowchilla Womens Prison Abuse - ACTS - AWD - Shield Legal • LA County Foster Care Abuse - ACTS - DL/Flatirons - Shield Legal • LA County Foster Care Abuse - ACTS - Laba Forman - Shield Legal • Chowchilla Womens Prison Abuse - ACTS - Kuzyk - Shield Legal Then update Monday
...can you shoot me the github link that holds your Sanic web app example?
It is not an example. You will be adding to it. https://github.com/shield-legal/internal-tools-site
Could you look over my PR before it gets merged? https://github.com/shield-legal/internal-tools-site/pull/3/files
Yes. Looked at each change and observed the differences and that the imports made sense to me.
New code…, I glanced at to see if I could understand what it was doing.
Did it help with the page you are working on?
Not with the step I am stuck on. Connecting to Postgres to load the listbox. I wanted sit down with you tomorrow at some time.
I also know that we have the Zapier files to look at as well.
That is all the index page does. https://github.com/shield-legal/internal-tools-site/blob/11a0b71185c48e074b1de3b7328299492ad819d4/main.py#L28-L32 Or you can reference the auth system: https://github.com/shield-legal/internal-tools-site/blob/11a0b71185c48e074b1de3b7328299492ad819d4/auth/middleware.py#L39-L63
San Diego County JDC Abuse | SGGH | AWD | Shield Legal
what is in this page https://parser.zapier.com/mailboxes/?
Source ^
Marketing Campaign: Shield Legal - AWD
This was last updated Mar 3 and have merge conflicts. If the necessary changes are already in main please close this PR: https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/122
Actually, I will stay until my regular time. With this rain coming down traffic is a little bit slow.
Once you update the vga test leads to not include NA. Then please check the LR automations, we will be sending the tests shortly after I get there
716328 - Gaming Addiction - Meadow Law/Levinson/TC (TIP) - Shield Legal Will be ready in 5-10 minutes
585418 - Meadow Law/Levinson/TC (TIP) - Shield Legal 489009 - Meadow Law/Levinson/TC (TIP) - Shield Legal 716328 - Gaming Addiction - Meadow Law/Levinson/TC (TIP) - Shield Legal
Gaming Addiction - Meadow Law - Crump (TIP) - Shield Legal Lead ID: 720090 External ID (Meadow): 2500377 External ID (Crump): 2503854
Gaming Addiction - Meadow Law - Crump (TIP) - Shield Legal Lead ID: 720090 External ID (Meadow): 2500377 External ID (Crump): 2503854
Gaming Addiction - Meadow Law - Ghozland (TIP) - Shield Legal Lead ID: 550520 External ID: 2500376
Gaming Addiction - Meadow Law/Levinson/TC (TIP) - Shield Legal Lead ID: 585418 External ID: 2500375 ---------------------------- Lead ID: 489009 External ID: 2500374 ---------------------------- Lead ID: 716328 External ID: 2500373
Gaming Addiction - Meadow Law/Levinson/TC (TIP) - Shield Legal Lead ID: 585418 External ID: 2500375 ---------------------------- Lead ID: 489009 External ID: 2500374 ---------------------------- Lead ID: 716328 External ID: 2500373
If you cant find something ask. The lead ids are in the image with the udfs
Good afternoon Dustin. I think the Crump updates are correct now. We had a Date of Diagnosis custome field transposed. I fixed that and submitted a new test. I am waiting on Julian's response.
your commit messages for the crump PR are misleading. the push you did at 3:45 to fix date of diagnosis did not got deployed until now
After finding the transposed characters I performed the Push and Commit command
OK I will retrigger the lead one more time
The automation in github to push the code to gcp failed
Anthony said 1 per 5 seconds is fine after 7 PM. I did not get to finish the script. I will finish it tomorrow and have you run it
I recommend putting this in the lawruler-ui project (it only requires 2 libraries).
Before running add the comma delimited list from excel to the leads variable and update the values in cookies dict with the cookies from LR in chrome unless you add error handling and the virtual chrome window from lock_leads.py
Check LR on one of the leads to see if you can change the status. Since they are locked you require admin rights to modify the status
Thanks for checking before we use the script
OK I am logged back in. I duplicated the logging script into the code..., now I am customizing it for logging our submissions. I will slack you when I feel it is ready.
I pushed the code..., I am sure something may need to be adjusted but I feel somewhat confident.
Where did you push it? I sent you the file instead putting it in a repo
Found it. Do you want to use screen sharing for going over the changes that are needed or wait until tomorrow?
I created a the file and added it to GIT through PyCharm
i am hungry and want to eat dinner but I can hop back on afterwards if you would like.
Do you want to just review the changes after they are made?
Or spend time in the office tomorrow working on it?
I will make notes and send them to you soon
• You need to init a session var near the progress bar and pass it to update_session_cookiesfor the authentication (also means you do not need the cookies var)
• The log is a good idea but needs to be defined above the loop that changes the status
• Should not pass anything into the handle_log function
• We will need a log.send((lead, response.text)) in the for loop
• We need to add error handling similar to lock_leads.pyL132
{ "data": { "uuid": "bd808f75-2d31-11f0-94ba-0a870352fb4f", "dual_rep": false }, "message": "Created case 4575525" }
new branch created with your commits. update_status_script . Now you can create a PR
load_dotenv() needs to be be either above def run() of at least above line 48
Hey Dustin, Do you think it would be OK to start now?
I'm thinking at 6 there are few people on the phones. I'd like to see the results ASAP.
Compromise!!! You're getting better at this supervisor deal.
I'll shoot you a Slack message once I start.
We will have to look into any errors on monday. Looks like 1 is a lead with only a first name in the injured name field
It will be easier to filter the db for fails after all the triggers are complete
What time do we need to stop tonight or is that Sunday night only?
Let's try to get them all done tomorrow so we do not have to run any on Sunday. I'm just a little worried about the db migration lr is doing Sunday night
OK. About to load 432 ** 5 Second = 2160 seconds or 36 minutes
I'll start the rest tomorrow afternoon. I think the call center goes until 2-3 PM on Saturday
Something like that. Let's plan for 4 as the start just in case
Initially thought that but wasn't sure you'd want to wait that long!!!
Good Afternoon Dustin. I'm starting the last batch of leads now...
BCL Camp Lejune errors: lead_id 133755 125007 76102 76983 79436 144531 76951 76560 128728 83689 73584 76578
Lets test the new calendar. Make an event [Name] - [OOO or Remote] and invite Integrations Schedule as a guest
use SL Data Schedule instead of Integrations Schedule
add .replace('Self', '').strip() to the end of line 17 for both case types
Camp Lejeune - Dicello - Crump (TC) - BLX (239) Lead # 552594
Lead IDs: 382366, 80805, 552594 have been processed successfully
I will have Julian check these three intakes tomorrow morning. If he is approves them, I will run our multi lead process with the remaining leads.
{
"Lead ID": 80805,
"caseType": "Camp Lejeune Case - Not Death",
"firstName": "Thomas",
"middleName": "karl",
"lastName": "Soares",
"phone": "+19565968766",
"address": "1001 S Ed Carey Dr #208",
"city": "Harlingen",
"state": "Texas",
"zip": "78552",
"Gender": "",
"dob": "03-06-1931",
"ssn": "",
"email": "<a href="mailto:polley.richard@gmail.com">polley.richard@gmail.com</a>",
"prefix": "Prefix",
"injuredFirstName": "Thomas",
"injuredMiddleName": "Karl",
"injuredLastName": "Soares",
"injuredDoB": "04-06-1931",
"injuredDoD": "02-01-1973",
"Injury Tier": "1",
"Internal ID": 80805,
"Date of diagnosis": "01-01-1972",
"Did you suffer any of the following injuries (quick injuries) as a result of your time at Camp LeJeune?": "Multiple Myeloma",
"Other Injuries": "",
"retainedDate": "05-22-2025"
}
Is there something I can to to resolve the mapping issue?
You mentioned making a change but you had meetings and then I had to leave
we talked about it this morning, we need to copy https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/blob/c74d0cc9fd8761f84c31f2a930253a46fd7f30e1/intake_299/main.py#L17-L23 but with the signer fields (LR and UDF) which also means setting the signer UDFs to blank in the mapping
On it now. for some reason I thought you said you were going to update something
```from datetime import datetime, UTC
import functions_framework from flask import Request
from gcputils import functionmapping from smartadvocate import send_info
@functionsframework.http def main(request: Request): postgres, intake, attachments, data = functionmapping(request)
# BCL Key
key = '88446caa759a44e6b523b8bd52031ffa'
data['retainedDate'] = datetime.now(UTC).strftime('%m-%d-%Y')
signers_name = list(intake['c-2041'].replace("N/A", "").split(' '))
if signers_name:
data['signersFirstName'] = signers_name.pop(0)
if len(signers_name) >= 2:
data['signersMiddleName'] = ' '.join(signers_name[:-1])
data['signersLastName'] = signers_name[-1]
injured_name = list(intake['c-1815'].replace("N/A", "").split(' '))
if injured_name:
data['injuredFirstName'] = injured_name.pop(0)
if len(injured_name) >= 2:
data['injuredMiddleName'] = ' '.join(injured_name[:-1])
data['injuredLastName'] = injured_name[-1]
if intake['c-2042'].lower().strip() == 'self':
# data['firstName'] = data.pop('injuredFirstName') or data['firstName']
# data['middleName'] = data.pop('injuredMiddleName') or data['middleName']
# data['lastName'] = data.pop('injuredLastName') or data['lastName']
data['dob'] = data.pop('injuredDoB') or data['dob']
intake_response = send_info(key, postgres, intake, attachments, data)
print('Finished')
return intake_response```
remove the signers prefix in the field names and lower case the first letter. It should match in the mapping firstName
Git stores the user, date and time on each commit. therefore we do not need to add it in the message...
Also your latest commit was only 3 of the 4 campaigns
...and 239 didn't have an update on my last few commits,
Just finished up the remaining lead ideas. I’m gonna eat dinner and then I’m gonna check big query to see the results.
Hello Dustin..., can you tell me if you see any of these Crump Leads in the error logs:
80805,101367,101383,101394
leadid,intakeresponse 101394,"<Response [200]> {""result"":""2504704""}" 101383,"<Response [200]> {""result"":""2504703""}" 101367,"<Response [200]> {""result"":""2504702""}" 80805,"<Response [200]> {""result"":""2504701""}"
OK I see my issue. I fat fingered the case type ID. Thanks.
I forgot to create a new branch for the ELG Campaign.
Then you can still create the new branch
Pull the last commit down..., but I can just create the new Branch from Main.
distracted and I think what your saying is correct
I was..., Yes is correct (Milwaukee Lingo)
but I like to verify and the way to do that remote is screenshots or screen sharing and I dont think that is a necessary step
I have fixed your branch, run the following commands:
git fetch
git reset origin/Firefighting-Foam-ELG-Ye-Shield-Legal --hard
ELG urls:
# Stage: <https://fms.elglaw.com/fmi/data/v1/databases/ELGFMPStage/sessions>
# Prod: <https://fms.elglaw.com/fmi/data/v1/databases/ELGFMP/sessions>
token = <a href="http://requests.post">requests.post</a>('<https://fms.elglaw.com/fmi/data/v1/databases/ELGFMP/sessions>', headers=headers, json={}).json()['response']['token']
# Stage: <https://fms.elglaw.com/fmi/data/vLatest/databases/ELGFMPStage/layouts/APIRequest/records/>
# Prod: <https://fms.elglaw.com/fmi/data/vLatest/databases/ELGFMP/layouts/APIRequest/records/>
url = '<https://fms.elglaw.com/fmi/data/vLatest/databases/ELGFMP/layouts/APIRequest/records/>'
Please review https://github.com/shield-legal/internal-tools-site/pull/7 first thing. I want to merge it in before 11:30
- you left your camera battery charging in the office
The problem with the ELG integration is the following lines needs to use elg_data instead of data:
data['fieldData']['Payload'] = json.dumps(data['fieldData']['Payload'])
intake_response = <a href="http://requests.post">requests.post</a>(url, json=data, headers=headers)
By the way the PR I had you review replaces the one you made https://github.com/shield-legal/internal-tools-site/pull/4 . Did you view the comments on the PR (the screenshot & file)? Did you spot the difference between how the xlsx is created vs the exe?
Yes. I like the new look of the web app; including the option to select Question IDs
The checkbox just toggles if the tab and question id is in the appended at the end of the question in the headers
When I am done with ELG, I'll pull down the changes and take a look at it's functionality.
Please review: https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/148 I want to merge this in so I can test it in the refactor branch
Remember all communication needs to be professional and at least address all questions that were asked but preferably answer them
That was an issue with hitting the return key. I am writing a retort to that email.
2055 - MI Clergy Abuse SEC - SGGH - Meadow Law - Meadow Law
Should we add this campaign as well?
Sorry they apparently do not respect meeting end times...
API: https://intake.handled.co/ Docs: https://intake.handled.co/docs API KEY (X-API-Key header): cb60ba3d9a6a480b30d01b334e1c379ef9750fdd5f6179cfb07d5f08b1946175
API: https://intake.handled.co/ Docs: https://intake.handled.co/docs API KEY (X-API-Key header): cb60ba3d9a6a480b30d01b334e1c379ef9750fdd5f6179cfb07d5f08b1946175
import requests
requests.get('<https://intake.handled.co/auth/whoami>', headers={'X-API-Key': 'cb60ba3d9a6a480b30d01b334e1c379ef9750fdd5f6179cfb07d5f08b1946175'})
import requests
requests.get('<https://intake.handled.co/auth/whoami>', headers={'X-API-Key': 'cb60ba3d9a6a480b30d01b334e1c379ef9750fdd5f6179cfb07d5f08b1946175'})
Intakes worked, now to finish the secondary automation and test them
UPDATE: I submitted a few Secondary Leads today, I know they processed but I can not find the logs. I am still looking.
Although you can find them in the integrations_log
What does the echo_function logs say?
Don't forget to check your email for any code wrrors
OK I am looking at the json file, I am confirming that the data is mapped correctly.
That's not the problem. The problem is the url for the echo function. Please check the email
OK. I will do some testing tomorrow when I get to Milwaukee
I’ll be making my updates in about 90 minutes. I just pulled in to Milwaukee from driving from Chicago.
SGGH Secondary Leads are still being tested and we should have results within the hour.
Please review: https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/211
I am looking in the logs for 2037..., The integrationlog does not have any casetype_id records.
Can you look to see if you..., wait let me check the integration_errors view
Work with @Zekarias Haile, he was working on it Friday
Is this the script to redeploy:
& "C:/Users/Dwight Thomas/AppData/Local/Programs/Python/Python312/python.exe" "c:\Users\Dwight Thomas\.vscode\extensions\ms-python.python-2025.4.0-win32-x64\python_files\printEnvVariablesToFile.py" "c:\Users\Dwight Thomas\.vscode\extensions\ms-python.python-2025.4.0-win32-x64\python_files\deactivate\powershell\envVars.txt"
no to redeploy you click the following. I did that just before the meeting
Also your slack still says your on vacation
Is there anything on here that my help determine why this is still in error.
No, The error is that you are using a lead for the secondary that has an intake in 2022 but the intake was never triggered
So I need to retrigger 2022 before retriggering 2037?
The intake has to be triggered before the secondary or there will be an error. The intake only has to be triggered once
Hmm, I retrigger this the other day, but who knows what may have occurred. I am on it now.
Gotcha..., I just retriggered the main intake
I pushed a new commit, give it a few minutes then retrigger the secondary
made another small change that should fix sggh
Appreciate it man!!! I’ll shoot off a test after the meeting
When you get back next week I will fill you in on some of these new Zapier tasks I will be working on.
Getting the files together only to find out that the documents were disabled. So finishing them up now.
2054 - MI Clergy ran successfully. 2055 - MI Clergy SEC abended: https://console.cloud.google.com/errors/detail/CKDr8q7iZGVA;locations=global;time=P30D?project=integrations-tip&utmsource=error-reporting-notification&utmmedium=email&utmcontent=new-error|https://console.cloud.google.com/errors/detail/CKDr8q7iZGVA;locations=global;time=P30D?[…]ting-notification&utmmedium=email&utm_content=new-error
Looking to see what I can find in the logs.
I'll hop on it for now. If I haven't found anything by 2:00 I'll let you know.
I'm comparing CustomField Numbers, formatting...,
I am going to add a print statement to gcp_utils.py to see what value is being passed that we are getting an error for.
I am updating the runlocal.py tool to allow me to debug it. my understanding of the error so far is that the intakejson variable that gets passed to _convertvaluekeys is a str somehow
Yes that's what Daniel discovered while we were looking at it.
if you add a print keep it in the sggh main. such as <a href="http://logger.info">logger.info</a>(intake) between L34 & L35
hint: <a href="http://logger.info">logger.info</a> is the same print in the context of this project
I got a 200 for 2055. Look over my 3 commits
Found it, but I am not seeing the 200 response in the logs (on the database)
Ok..., so I in turn should pull your changes down to my branch
OK Updated my branch and I see your changes now.
I'll retrigger on my side and get the test files set up for SEC
Why did you commit the intake and sec files to the repo?
...to have them accessible to all of us if we wanted to download the files.
thats why they are in cloud storage. only code should be in the repo
its in the integration_log table: https://console.cloud.google.com/storage/browser/shield-legal-2054/225084/intake
OK so we can upload the intake_payloads to that storage..., I never noticed the upload link before you mentioned this.
the intake.json & secondary.json are auto-uploaded
the payload.json that we create, we normally send right away
we cannot store them just anywhere since they personal information
Just make the zip file that I asked for
Can you send me the intake and secondary lead ids?
MI Clergy Abuse - SGGH - Meadow Law - Meadow Law Intake #: 768351
MI Clergy Abuse SEC - SGGH - Meadow Law - Meadow Law SEC Lead: 753886
MI Foster Care Abuse - SGGH - Meadow Law - Meadow Law Intake #: 733965
MI Foster Care Abuse SEC - SGGH - Meadow Law - Meadow Law SEC Lead: 738999
MI YRTC Abuse - SGGH - Meadow Law - Meadow Law Intake #: 740087
MI YRTC Abuse SEC - SGGH - Meadow Law - Meadow Law SEC Lead: 740431
MI Juv Hall Abuse - SGGH - Meadow Law - Meadow Law Intake #: 748176
MI Juv Hall Abuse SEC - SGGH - Meadow Law - Meadow Law SEC Lead: 751879
And did you upload the files in the SEC or Intake folders?
Are you working on building this?
Looks like your commit removed the lr_questions.** files and you did not add the new ones
these need to stay but blank if not in the questionaire:
"Emergency Contact Name:": "",
"Emergency Contact Relationship:": "",
"Emergency Contact Address:": "c-25885",
"Emergency Contact Phone Number:": "",
"Do we have permission to contact this person if we are unable to get a hold of you?": "",
"Do we have permission to reference your case to this person? (We will not discuss your case with anyone without your permission)": ""
I see..., they were in the unversionized folder. Sending them now.
Does that mean they are not in the correct folder?
All but the questions block should exist but be empty if no question exists
They are but when you go to commit, the first time a file is added it is placed in an Unversionized Files Folder
Also for the secondary we should not have the Intake/ values
The changes to the tools were pulled from your branch. No comments for 2084?
https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/216#pullrequestreview-2963926755
You didn't see these comments?
I did. I just didnt see any comments for any files in firm_Case_Works/2084/
Oh..., yes. Because those files we brand new..., I guess I could have (Should have summarized the new files. That was on me.
name the payload.json files with the case type name (example MI Foster Care Abuse - SGGH - Meadow Law - Shield Legal.json )
name the payload.json files with the case type name (example MI Foster Care Abuse - SGGH - Meadow Law - Shield Legal.json )
Will do. I just wanted to get all created before the meeting.
MI Clergy Intake has duplicate fields in questions and abusers. Please remove the duplicates from the questions block. MI Clergy SEC has a lot of custom ids that do not exist on the form. + duplicate questions between abusers and questions. MI Foster SEC has a lot of custom ids that do not exist on the form. MI Juv Hall SEC has a lot of custom ids that do not exist on the form.
I’ll knock it out as soon as I get to the house
All CaMpAigns have been rerun. I have to look at 2038 to see why i haven' received the email.
Do you have the link that I can check the logs for the secondary 2038 runs?
Still has c-####
• MI Juv Hall SEC
• MI YRTC SEC
• MI Foster SEC
• MI Clergy SEC
Also on the SEC mappings replace Lead ID with Intake Log/lead_id
Also on the SEC mappings replace Lead ID with Intake Log/lead_id
• MI Juv
◦ Move If yes, describe the treatment: to treatment center block
◦ Move Type of Treatment: to treatment center block
• MI YRTC
◦ Move If yes, describe the treatment: to treatment center block
◦ Move Type of Treatment: to treatment center block
• MI Clergy SEC
◦ L218 (c-25994) is duplicated between treatment center and questions
What about the payloads for the OSOL? Or where those already approved?
• MI Foster Care
◦ Therapist should not be empty. It should contain empty values
• MI Juv Hall
◦ Replace \u00a0 with a space
• MI YRTC SEC
◦ Replace \u00a0 with nothing
◦ Replace \n with nothing
◦ Format does not match mapping JSON in GitHub (most fields are in questions instead of split in blocks)
• MI Clergy SEC
◦ Still has c-####
• MI Juv SEC
◦ Therapist should not be empty. It should contain empty values
◦ Treatment Center is missing fields. It should contain empty values
◦ Replace \u00a0 with nothing
◦ Replace \n with nothing
◦ Still has c-####
• MI Foster SEC
◦ Signer is missing fields
◦ Abusers is missing fields
◦ Therapist should not be empty. It should contain empty values
◦ Treatment Center is missing fields. It should contain empty values
◦ Replace \u2019 with '
◦ Replace \u00a0 with a space
Test lead for Video Gaming Sextortion - Cooper Masterman - AWD - Shield Legal
You have ELG changes on your SGGH branch
When you get in and get settled, I got something to show you. I’m having an issue using payload.py
Here are the test payloads and documents for the SGGH:
MI YRTC Abuse (w/Secondary):
Did you hit send? I do not see the email
nvm, my laptop and wifi were being weird
replace Contact/MaritalStatus with Contact/MaritalStatus/Name
<a href="mailto:casereviewphonetransfer@robot.zapier.com">casereviewphonetransfer@robot.zapier.com</a>
Here is everything I have changed for the SGGH campaigns. I will generate new payloads and response to Handled tomorrow. Please mention any issues you see in the changes I made.
What do the logs for ELG show for the document response?
Next time, please pull from the db instead of cloud run
The new leads I created triggered and documents were generated.
Then ask for verification on their side. It looks like you might have used the same contact for all of them, you might want to mention it in the email so he does not get confused.
I received all of these. Would you mind sending me the responses you got from the DocumentIntakeV1 calls? We did not get the documents; however, I think this is an issue on our end.
Can you verify that there are not any other responses received related to sending document other than this:
[["Gunther-795045-SignedContract.pdf", "<Response [200]>", "{\"response\":{\"scriptError\":\"0\",\"recordId\":\"109916\",\"modId\":\"0\"},\"messages\":[{\"code\":\"0\",\"message\":\"OK\"}]}"]]
Merge the 2101 folder with firm_LegaFi/2101
Not sure if you saw this:
File "/workspace/2101/main.py", line 104, in main
"ssn": data["Injured Party's SSN: (123-45-6789) "],
~~~~^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
KeyError: "Injured Party's SSN: (123-45-6789) "
delete 2008 from this folder: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/11j2pg8n3SECVOk9_AUPSzHX0V0jZnO6h
Please ask Legafi and ELG if they need backfills.
*Thread Reply:* Pulling up to the house now I’ll login and send the email.
I do not see your reply to stephen in my email
Sorry it ended up on a different thread
Retrigger the attached leads for 2084
Please re-review this PR: https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/228
There should be another ELG on Monday if you want to work on it
Test Payload for AFFF PFAS Military Base Exposure - Levinson - ELG - MC CA - Shield Legal (Test Lead: 807789)
When you have a moment fix the not finalized note
Please review https://github.com/shield-legal/gcp-integrations/pull/220 Then create a new test lead
Video Gaming Sextortion - Cooper Masterman - AWD - Shield Legal - New Test Lead Beyonce Knowles-Carter Test (811688)
sign the doc then send. make sure intake is set to TEST TEST before signing the doc
Do you have a recommendation on the best reference on administering Github?
*Thread Reply:* A how to perform certain tasks and administration of Github.
*Thread Reply:* Dows this help? https://docs.github.com/en
Please move Naya - Ford - Test in Monday to Not Queued
MI Clergy Abuse - SGGH - Meadow - Ghozland - Shield Legal is not on monday.com
MI YRTC Abuse - SGGH - Meadow Law - Shield Legal
793145,Empty Email/Phone will not generate case. 801569,Empty Email/Phone will not generate case.
update the api_triggers table to set 2102 to test and send the broken lead through the test container before we merge in PR 245
*Thread Reply:* Setting active to false sets the API to test?
the 2 sggh cases that you added test to needs something in the field in order to be a test
no, that disables it. @Daniel Schussler can show you how to set it test
def _check_to_see_test_lead(json_data) -> bool:
if "test" in json_data:
return True
else:
return False
\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\---
json_data = json.dumps(data, indent=4)
if _check_to_see_test_lead(json_data):
del data['test']
else:
postgres.update_response(obj.log_row['id'], f'<Response [000]> {json_data}')
def _check_to_see_test_lead(json_data) -> bool:
if "test" in json_data:
return True
else:
return False
\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\---
json_data = json.dumps(data, indent=4)
if _check_to_see_test_lead(json_data):
del data['test']
else:
postgres.update_response(obj.log_row['id'], f'<Response [000]> {json_data}')
This is pretty much what we are looking to do, correct?
put the postgres where the del is and remove the else
but everhing after the dash line would go in the firm main.py
Yes this goes into gcp_utils.py:
def checktoseetestlead(jsondata) -> bool: if "test" in json_data: return True else: return False ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Yes this goes into main.py:
jsondata = json.dumps(data, indent=4)
if _checktoseetestlead(jsondata):
postgres.updateresponse(obj.logrow['id'], f'
Yes this goes into gcp_utils.py:
def checktoseetestlead(jsondata) -> bool: if "test" in json_data: return True else: return False ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Yes this goes into main.py:
jsondata = json.dumps(data, indent=4)
if _checktoseetestlead(jsondata):
postgres.updateresponse(obj.logrow['id'], f'
If we can merge the gcp_utils.py code, I can fetch it into my test branch to test it.
Update as listed below
FROM: post_data['lead_id']
TO: post_data.get('lead_id')
Do you have permission to make the changes on Monday?
Also status columns to match the assignees
Good morning / afternoon again,
The following test leads have been resubmitted. Please verify that you have received them and the data is to your satisfaction:
Gunther Testing - MI Juv Hall Abuse - Ghozland - SGGH - Meadow Law - Shield Legal: Lead # 806052 Jack Testing - MI Juv Hall Abuse OSOL - Ghozland - SGGH - Meadow Law - Shield Legal: Lead # 806058 Jack Tester - MI YRTC Abuse - Ghozland - SGGH - Meadow Law - Shield Legal: Lead # 806097 Alexander Test - MI YRTC Abuse OSOL - Ghozland - SGGH - Meadow Law - Shield Legal: Lead # 806103 O'Ryan Tester - MI Juv Hall Abuse - AFG - SGGH - Meadow Law - Shield Legal: Lead # 806136 Action Tester Bronson - MI Juv Hall Abuse OSOL - AFG - SGGH - Meadow Law - Shield Legal: Lead # 822869 Gunther Testing - MI YRTC Abuse - AFG - SGGH - Meadow Law - Shield Legal: Lead # 806141 Donovan Test - MI YRTC Abuse OSOL - AFG - SGGH - Meadow Law - Shield Legal: Lead # 806151 Beyonce Knowles-Carter Test - MI Clergy Abuse - SGGH - Meadow - Ghozland - Shield Legal: Lead # 818030 Donavon Slade Tester - MI Clergy Abuse - AFG - SGGH - Meadow - Shield Legal: Lead # 817842 Action Tester Bronson - MI Foster Care Abuse - SGGH - Meadow - Yih - Shield Legal: Lead # 814275 Gunther Testing - MI Clergy Abuse - SGGH - Meadow - Yih - Shield Legal: Lead # 813516 Beyonce Knowles-Carter Test - MI Juv Hall Abuse OSOL - SGGH - Meadow - Yih - Shield Legal: Lead # 814412 Mark Tester - MI Juv Hall Abuse - SGGH - Meadow - Yih - Shield Legal: Lead # 814293 O'Ryan Tester - MI YRTC Abuse - SGGH - Meadow - Yih - Shield Legal: Lead # 815405 Donavon Slade Tester - MI YRTC Abuse OSOL - SGGH - Meadow - Yih - Shield Legal: Lead # 814928
When you get a moment can you update the status triggers for the MI SGGH campaigns that we just merged?
Missing GCP webhook:
MI Clergy Abuse - SGGH - GLF - Shield Legal
Good evening Dustan. I know it’s late, but I was looking at the GLF integration and they do not ask for the injured party’s individual first name or last name. I took this as an opportunity to take the injured party’s full name and parse it to get the first name and last name from the full name. I’m running a test now (I’ve pushed and committed that change). I’m testing as we speak and hopefully within the next five minutes, we’ll have the results that we expect. When you get the opportunity in the morning, could you take a look at the main.pie file to see the change that I made and if you agree with the method in which I parsed out first name and last name.
There should be a function in common/gcputils called splitname that should help
When mentioning a case type to a firm please make sure to use the full case type. Case Works / Angeion Group work on behalf of other firms, so they need to know which firms they are working with for this. Also we needed to have asked for the correct case type / co counsel (or relevant field) for this campaign.
In your latest email to angeiongroup, you still missed the full case type, which they will need to give us the correct ids
OK I guess I am confused. There is a Full Case Type in contrast to just a Case Type?
Do you have the test ready for angiongroup? He made a meeting for 1pm today...
The date information is corrected but the Case Statuses have not been updated. I I’m about to send out an email to ashley to let her know that the provider information that they were expected we do not gather.
Are you going to handle the comments from Case Works? Or do you want me to?
I was just reading the thread from yesterday. I will handle it.
OK I am sending Ashely a request for a call today. I want to let her know that this campaign has already begun and that while we can change the mappings to reflect the new field names, we can not add the multiple providers to the campaign. Are you OK with that and would you want to be in the meeting?
Yes. From the email that I am reading she want to update those field names in the mapping to the following:
...or am I reading her email incorrectly?
We just have to set Provider1 to c-26167 in the mapping. She is not asking for changes to the questions only additions in the mapping
<Response [000]> {
"Case Type": "Military PFAS-SL-TestTraining",
"Case SubType": "RRS-Attestation-AG Outreach",
"FirmID": "SL",
"FirmCaseNO": 827848,
"Office": "Shield Legal",
"FirstName": "Maximus",
"MiddleName": "Artillious",
"LastName": "Testing",
"Mobile_Phone": "<tel:(714)294-9163|(714) 294-9163>",
"Address": "3324 Maple Ave",
"City": "Los Angeles",
"State": "CA",
"Zip": "90011",
"Email": "<a href="mailto:mxtest@armyspy.com">mxtest@armyspy.com</a>",
"DoB": "08/14/1984",
"SSN": "814652155",
"Gender": "Male",
"Referral_LawFirm": "The Nations Law Firm",
"(Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) Name:": "Baptist Hospital East",
"(Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) Phone Number:": "<tel:(502)897-8100|(502) 897-8100>",
"(Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) Fax Number:": "<tel:(502)897-5906|(502) 897-5906>",
"(Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) Mailing Address Line 1:": "4000 Kresge Way",
"(Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) Mailing Address Line 2:": "Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) Mailing Address Line 2:",
"(Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) City:": "Louisville",
"(Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) State:": "Kentucky",
"(Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) Zip:": "40220",
"(Primary Care Physician) Name:": "David Lackey, APRN",
"(Primary Care Physician) Phone Number:": "<tel:(000)123-4567|(000) 123-4567>",
"(Primary Care Physician) Fax Number:": "<tel:(502)212-7551|(502) 212-7551>",
"(Primary Care Physician) Mailing Address Line 1:": "2800 Breckenridge Lane",
"(Primary Care Physician) Mailing Address Line 2:": "Suite 200",
"(Primary Care Physician) City:": "Louisville",
"(Primary Care Physician) State:": "Kentucky",
"(Primary Care Physician) Zip:": "40220",
"(Treating Doctor/Facility) Name:": "David Lackey, APRN",
"(Treating Doctor/Facility) Phone Number:": "<tel:(502)893-7462|(502) 893-7462>",
"(Treating Doctor/Facility) Fax Number:": "<tel:(502)212-7551|(502) 212-7551>",
"(Treating Doctor/Facility) Mailing Address Line 1:": "2800 Breckenridge Lane",
"(Treating Doctor/Facility) Mailing Address Line 2:": "Suite 200",
"(Treating Doctor/Facility) City:": "Louisville",
"(Treating Doctor/Facility) State:": "Kentucky",
"(Treating Doctor/Facility) Zip:": "40220",
"Provider1": "Baptist Hospital East",
"Case Details": "THIS IS A TEST FOR THE WEBHOOK AUTOMATION - DMT",
"test": "TEST",
"Notes:": "THIS IS A TEST FOR THE WEBHOOK AUTOMATION - DMT",
"Integration Key": "e360970fabb344eab747f6657b330bb5"
}
I did add the test field to assess the results before I send these test to Ashley. I saw you sent a couple of test yesterday. Should I resend those just to make sure she receives all four case types from me?
No. Replace (... Doctor/Facility) with the Provider(1,2,3) fields from the docs / emails she sent us
OK..., That's what I initially thought. I misread you response earlier. Another reason to test without sending to Caseworks
{
"Case Type": "Military PFAS-SL-TestTraining",
"Case SubType": "RRS-Attestation-AG Outreach",
"FirmID": "SL",
"FirmCaseNO": "Lead ID",
"Office": "Shield Legal",
"FirstName": "c-25843",
"MiddleName": "c-25844",
"LastName": "c-25845",
"Mobile_Phone": "c-25857",
"Address": "c-25852",
"City": "c-25854",
"State": "c-25855",
"Zip": "c-25856",
"Email": "c-25859",
"DoB": "c-25848",
"SSN": "c-25856",
"Gender": "c-25900",
"Referral_LawFirm": "The Nations Law Firm",
"Injured_Party_Prefix": "c-25849",
"Injured_Party_FirstName": "Contact/Firstname",
"Injured_Party_MiddleName": "Contact/MiddleName",
"Injured_Party_LastName": "Contact/Lastname",
"Injured_Party_Address": "8",
"Injured_Party_City": "10",
"Injured_Party_State": "11",
"Injured_Party_Zip": "12",
"Injured_Party_Phone": "15",
"Injured_Party_Mobile_Phone": "Contact/CellPhone",
"Injured_Party_Email": "16",
"Injured_Party_DoB": "c-25870",
"Injured_Party_DoD": "c-25842",
"Injured_Party_SSN": "20",
"Injured_Party_Gender": "c-25899",
"Provider1:": "c-26167",
X - "(Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) Phone Number:": "c-26169",
X - "(Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) Fax Number:": "c-26170",
"Provider1_Address1": "c-26171",
"Provider1_Address2": "c-26172",
X - "(Diagnosing Doctor/Facility) City:": "c-26173",
"Provider1_State": "c-26174",
"Provider1_Zip": "c-26175",
"Provider2": "c-26186",
X - "(Primary Care Physician) Phone Number:": "c-26187",
X - "(Primary Care Physician) Fax Number:": "c-26188",
"Provider2_Address1": "c-26189",
"Provider2_Address2": "c-26190",
X - "(Primary Care Physician) City:": "c-26191",
"Provider2_State": "c-26192",
"Provider2_Zip": "c-26193",
"Provider3": "c-26195",
X - "(Treating Doctor/Facility) Phone Number:": "c-26197",
X - "(Treating Doctor/Facility) Fax Number:": "c-26198",
"Provider3_Address1": "c-26199",
"Provider3_Address2": "c-26200",
X - "(Treating Doctor/Facility) City:": "c-26201",
"Provider3_State": "c-26202",
"Provider3_Zip": "c-26203",
"Case Details": "c-25890",
"Notes:": "c-25890"
}
Using the fields Ashley supplied, here's how they were replaced in the mapping.json file. Should I keep in the fields marked with an X in the Mapping file?
OK I have made test runs for the Military and Non Military Test and Live Case Types
They will be put in the QA channel and if approved I will submit the test this evening for CaseWorks to receive.
Do not use live case type until right before the merge
Does the "test" field not prevent submitting to CaseWorks?
it does. I mean the casetype field in the mapping
Correct. I was just generating payloads for all four to see what gets sent.
I wasn't going to send them a test until I saw how each payload looked.
They should all be the same but I wanted to see them first
BTW, IL JDC Abuse - Baypoint - SGGH - Shield Legal. Did we resolve the "discussWithOtherLawFirm": "otherFirm#no" issue? I got a Slack Message from Greg about this campaign?
That piece is correct. We working on another part.
We do not do tests to firms production systems unless specifically asked.
In her initial email she mentioned testing with the test case types and once they provided us with the green light, to send one through the live server.
This says to set the case types to prod but not to send a test to prod
This says to set the case types to prod but not to send a test to prod
Also is there a military question to change between the military and non military case types?
Yes. I saw code in the main.py that addresses this
