← Home

Frequently asked questions

How DockItFlo works, how setup goes, how the human review layer fits in, how we handle date changes, and how we compare to the alternatives. Have a question that isn’t here? Ask us directly →

The product

What does DockItFlo do?
DockItFlo automates court docket monitoring for litigation firms. It reads every ECF notice your firm receives, extracts every deadline from the email body and attached PDFs, routes high-confidence items directly to your attorneys' calendars, and sends uncertain items to a human review queue. Your legal support team reviews flagged items in a few focused clicks each morning. Every court filing is also stored in a searchable case document library, so your team can find any document without logging into PACER or digging through email.
Who is DockItFlo built for?
Small to mid-size litigation firms with 2 to 50 attorneys that don't have a dedicated docketing department. If someone on your team is spending hours each week reading ECF notices, manually entering dates into a calendar, and hunting through email for court documents, DockItFlo was built for your firm.
How is DockItFlo different from other docketing tools?
Three things separate DockItFlo from the rest of the category. First, dependent deadline triggers — when a notice says “hearing 14 days after expert reports are filed,” DockItFlo creates a waiting trigger, monitors the case, and computes the deadline automatically when the filing arrives. No other tool does this. Second, every automated extraction goes through a structured human review before touching the calendar — not a basic approve/reject queue, but a purpose-built split-pane interface where your team sees the original document alongside editable dates. Third, the entire product is priced per attorney with AI included — no add-ons, no tiers that lock the most important feature behind the most expensive plan.
Does DockItFlo replace my practice management system?
No. DockItFlo is focused on ECF notice processing, deadline extraction, auto calendaring, and case document management. It works alongside practice management systems like Clio and Filevine. Clio integration is on the roadmap — confirmed deadlines will push directly into Clio matters automatically.

Setup

How long does setup take?
Two minutes and one minute per attorney. You add a unique DockItFlo intake email address to each attorney's PACER account — one field change. That's it. Notices start flowing immediately. No IT involvement, no credential sharing, no configuration project.
Do I need to share my PACER credentials with DockItFlo?
No. DockItFlo uses a unique intake email address per attorney. PACER sends ECF notices to that address the same way it sends them to any email. Your PACER credentials stay with you.
Does DockItFlo work with state courts?
DockItFlo currently processes federal ECF notices delivered via PACER. State court coverage depends on whether your state court uses a similar notice-by-email system.
What calendar systems does DockItFlo sync to?
Outlook and Google Calendar. Clio calendar integration is on the roadmap.

AI extraction

How does DockItFlo extract dates from ECF notices?
DockItFlo reads the complete text of every ECF notice — the full email body and every attached PDF. It doesn't stop at the subject line or the first paragraph. The AI identifies every date and deadline in the document, classifies each one by event type (hearing, discovery cutoff, trial, etc.), and assigns a confidence score to each extraction. High-confidence items auto-assign to the attorney's calendar. Low-confidence items go to the review queue for your legal support team to verify.
What happens when a scheduling order has 8 or 10 deadlines?
Each deadline becomes a separate calendar entry. A scheduling order with 8 deadlines produces 8 entries automatically — not one entry for the notice. This is one of the most common places other tools and manual processes break down.
What is a dependent deadline trigger?
Some court notices can't be calendared immediately because the date depends on a future event. For example: “Daubert motions due 14 days after filing of expert reports.” There's no date to put on the calendar yet. DockItFlo creates a waiting trigger, monitors the case for the triggering filing, and when it arrives, automatically computes the deadline date and routes it for human confirmation. No other docketing tool handles this category of deadline.
How does DockItFlo handle date changes — when a court continues or resets a deadline?
When a new ECF notice arrives, DockItFlo checks whether any extracted date appears to be a proposed change to a deadline already on the calendar. It looks for linguistic cues like “continued to,” “reset to,” and “rescheduled for,” cross-references against existing calendar entries for the same case, and flags matches as date change candidates in the review queue with a yellow POSSIBLE DATE CHANGE chip. The review modal shows the old and new dates side by side, lets the reviewer open the original notice, and offers two explicit paths: Confirm Date Change (supersedes the old deadline, removes it from the calendar, preserves both notices in the audit trail) or Confirm Separate Deadlines (keeps both as independent events). The AI proposes; the human confirms. Read the full feature walkthrough→
What happens to the original deadline when a date change is confirmed?
If the reviewer selects Confirm Date Change, the original deadline is removed from the attorney's calendar and the superseding notice is linked to the change in the case activity log. The new event carries a reference to the event it replaced. The full chain — original notice, incoming notice, reviewer decision, timestamp — is preserved. Nothing is deleted; the history is always accessible.
What if the AI flags something as a date change but it's actually a separate event?
The reviewer selects Confirm Separate Deadlines. Both events remain on the calendar as independent items, each linked to their respective notice. A Remove option is also available for cases where the extraction was a false positive entirely.
How accurate is the AI extraction?
Accuracy is high and improving continuously — we actively tune the AI prompts to tighten extraction precision over time. The human review layer exists not because the AI is unreliable, but because legal deadlines are professional responsibility work and the consequences of an error are too significant to skip human confirmation entirely. The goal is that the review step takes a few focused minutes each morning, not hours.
Does the AI get better over time?
Yes. DockItFlo continuously improves AI extraction accuracy through prompt tuning. As the system improves, the review queue gets shorter — more items auto-assign with confidence — which means less time in the queue for your legal support team.
Does DockItFlo know about Federal Rules of Civil Procedure deadlines?
Yes. The rules engine recognizes 38 distinct triggering filings across FRCP Sections 1-8 — Motion to Dismiss filed (Opposition due 14-21 days), Order Denying Motion to Dismiss (Answer due 14 days under Rule 12(a)(4)(A) — often missed), Interrogatories served (Response due 30 days under Rule 33), Requests for Admission served (30 days, deemed admitted if missed), Final Judgment entered (Notice of Appeal due 30 days under FRAP 4 — practically fatal if missed), Rule 59 motion (28 days, strict, cannot extend), and dozens more. When the AI detects one of these triggers in a notice, it suggests the resulting deadline computed via FRCP Rule 6 (with weekend and federal holiday rollover handled automatically) and surfaces it in a dedicated Rules-based tab on the Review Queue. The LAA verifies the rule citation, checks the local-rule warning if applicable, edits the date if their district shortens the default, and confirms. The deadline pushes to the lawyer's calendar with the rule citation in the event description. Read the full FRCP rules reference→
How does DockItFlo handle local rules that vary by district?
FRCP sets minimum standards. Most federal districts have Local Rules that shorten or modify these defaults — for example, motion oppositions are 14 days in the Northern District of California, 10 business days in the Southern District of New York, and 28 days in the Northern District of Illinois. When an FRCP rule allows a range (e.g., 14-21 days), DockItFlo computes the suggestion using the EARLIEST date in the range so you never miss a shorter local deadline. Every range-based suggestion gets an amber warning on the review card with the FRCP default and the full range, prompting the LAA to verify against your district's local rule and edit the date before confirming. We capture both the original FRCP default and any LAA edit so we can build a per-district registry from observed customer behavior over time.

Human review

Does everything go through human review?
Every automated extraction and deadline trigger gets reviewed before it touches the calendar. High-confidence extractions are presented for a quick confirmation. Low-confidence extractions are flagged more prominently for closer attention. The goal is a few focused clicks each morning, not a bottleneck.
What does the review queue look like?
Items are grouped by notice — not scattered as individual dates. A scheduling order with 8 deadlines appears as one review card, not 8 separate items. Clicking into it opens a split-pane modal: the original document on the left, editable dates on the right. Your team can edit a date, add one the AI missed, soft-delete one that's incorrect (with a restore option), and confirm the entire notice in one click. Every confirmed entry has a full audit trail.
Can my team edit dates before confirming?
Yes. The review modal allows editing any extracted field — date, time, event name — before confirmation. You can also add dates the AI missed and remove ones that are incorrect. Removed dates land in the Removed Dates table on the Review Queue, where firm admins can restore them with a single click and the row treatment makes it obvious why each one came off the calendar.
What happens if a date is changed by the court?
DockItFlo detects the date change automatically and flags the new notice in the review queue with a yellow POSSIBLE DATE CHANGE chip. The LAA reviews the old and new dates side by side and chooses either Confirm Date Change (supersedes the prior deadline) or Confirm Separate Deadlines (keeps both as independent events). On supersession, the prior deadline moves to the Removed Dates table with a strikethrough and a Superseded pill, the new date becomes the live obligation, and the connected attorney calendar gets two updates: the original event is preserved in place with a [CHANGED] prefix and strikethrough so any external reference still resolves, and the new event is added at the new date. The full chain — original notice, incoming notice, reviewer decision, timestamp — is preserved in the case activity log. The Removed Dates table distinguishes four retirement reasons (vacated, superseded, case-closed, AI-error), each with its own pill. The first three keep the event on the lawyer's calendar with strikethrough; AI-error rejections never reach the calendar because the LAA caught the bad extraction during review. Read the full lifecycle walkthrough→

Case documents

What is the Case Document Library?
Every ECF notice that flows into DockItFlo brings a PDF attachment. The Case Document Library stores and organizes all of those filings by case — searchable by document type, title, and full text. Your team can find any filing without logging into PACER or searching through email attachments. One click opens the original ECF notice alongside the PDF.
Why does document access matter?
Your calendar is forward-looking — it shows what's coming. Documents are backward-looking — they show what happened. When a paralegal is prepping for a hearing or drafting a motion, they need to find what was filed and when. The Case Document Library turns that into a seconds-long search instead of a 20-minute dig through PACER or email.

Practice areas

What is practice area management?
You can configure practice areas in Settings (for example, Commercial Litigation, Estate Planning) and assign attorneys to each area. Once configured, practice area filters appear across every view — the Docket Inbox, Case Master tab, Calendar, and Review Queue — so each group sees only their cases and notices. This is particularly useful for firms with multiple practice groups sharing one DockItFlo account.

Calendar sync

Can I add a lawyer to a case if they're not on the PACER notices?
Yes. Common scenario: an associate joins the firm mid-case (just graduated, drafting docs, helping out on the matter) but the PACER service list was already set, so they don't get notices. A firm admin opens the case in Case Master, clicks +Add lawyer in the Added for Calendar Sync row, picks the lawyer, and confirms. Every live case deadline pushes to the lawyer's connected calendar with an accept/dismiss email per event. Going forward, when new ECF notices arrive on the case and the LAA confirms dates, the manually-added lawyer's calendar gets the new events too via the same fan-out. The lawyer doesn't get PACER notices on the case (they're not on the service list); they just get the calendar deadlines. Reserved for firm admin permissions. Read the how-to→
Can I stop syncing a specific case to a lawyer's calendar without removing them entirely?
Yes. Inverse of the +Add lawyer flow. Common scenario: an associate drafted a complaint or motion early in the case but isn't going to be working on it ongoing — their calendar shouldn't get every deadline. A firm admin opens the lawyer's setup modal in the Lawyers tab, opens the new Cases tab, and toggles the case off. From that point on, future court dates on that case won't push to the lawyer's calendar. PACER notices keep flowing into DockitFlo as usual (the LAA still triages them); only the calendar push is suppressed. Existing pushed events are left in place on the calendar so the lawyer's reference to past hearings still resolves. Toggling back on re-pushes every current live event so the calendar reflects the case state again. Read the how-to→
How do lawyers connect their calendar?
From the Lawyers tab, open the lawyer's setup modal and go to the Calendar tab. Toggle calendar sync on (the master switch — defaults off so no lawyer ever gets surprise calendar invites). Click Google or Outlook / Microsoft to start the OAuth consent flow. After consent, the connected card shows the connection date. From then on, when an LAA confirms a court date for that lawyer, DockitFlo creates a calendar event on their connected calendar and emails them an accept/dismiss link. The lawyer can dismiss any event from the email if it shouldn't be on their calendar; the LAA can re-push if the dismissal was a mistake. Read the how-to→

Pricing

How is DockItFlo priced?
DockItFlo is priced per attorney per month. AI calendaring is included in every plan — it is not an add-on. Contact us for current pricing.
Is AI calendaring included or an extra cost?
Included. Every plan includes full AI deadline extraction. You should not have to pay extra for the feature that matters most.
Is there a free trial?
Contact us at dockitflo.com to schedule a demo. We'll walk through the product with real scheduling order data so you can see exactly what it does before committing.

Evaluating DockItFlo

“We already use CourtDrive for document management.”
CourtDrive's core use case is automated document pull-down and organization — and it does that well. But the AI calendaring is locked behind their most expensive tier, the review workflow is a basic approve/reject queue, and there are no dependent deadline triggers, no practice area management, and no confidence-based routing. If your team is on CourtDrive for the documents, DockItFlo handles the deadline intelligence layer that CourtDrive doesn't. Many firms will find they can replace CourtDrive entirely once they have DockItFlo's Case Document Library, or use both for a period while they transition.
“We already use DocketBird.”
DocketBird is primarily a court research and document access tool — their AI calendaring (AutoCalendar) is a paid add-on, not the core product. It has a thin review UI, no dependent deadline triggers, no practice area management, and no urgency routing. DockItFlo was built from the ground up as a deadline management and human review product. If your firm uses DocketBird for research access and monitoring competitor cases, that use case is completely separate from what DockItFlo does.
“We have a paralegal who handles this manually.”
That's exactly the person DockItFlo is built for. Manual processing of ECF notices at a 5-attorney firm can consume 7–10 hours of staff time per week — just the calendar entry step. At $25–35/hour that's $9,000–18,000/year in labor for a single administrative function, before you account for the risk of an error. DockItFlo doesn't replace your paralegal — it removes the data entry work so they can focus on higher-value tasks. They still confirm every deadline. They just do it in a few minutes each morning instead of hours.
“We're worried about AI making mistakes on legal deadlines.”
This is the right concern, and it's exactly why the human review layer is the center of the product, not a bolted-on feature. Every extraction goes through confirmation before it touches the calendar. The AI handles volume and catches everything. The human handles judgment and confirms accuracy. If the AI is uncertain, it flags the item more prominently. The system gets more accurate over time through continuous prompt improvement — which means the review queue gets shorter, not longer.
“What about date changes — won't the AI just create a duplicate?”
No — date change detection is a dedicated feature. When a notice contains language like “continued to” or “reset to,” DockItFlo flags it as a date change candidate in the review queue with a distinct visual treatment. The reviewer sees the old and new dates side by side, can open the original notice, and explicitly chooses whether to supersede the old deadline or keep both as separate events. The audit trail records the full decision chain either way. Read the full feature walkthrough→
“How do we know which deadline is current if a date gets moved?”
If the reviewer confirms a date change, the old deadline is removed from the attorney's calendar and the superseding notice is linked in the activity log. The new event carries a reference to what it replaced. The history is always accessible — nothing is deleted — but the calendar reflects only the current state.
“PacerPro came up — do you compete with them?”
Not directly. PacerPro is built for AmLaw 100 firms that already have dedicated docketing departments. Their products (PDF2Go, Manifold) automate document delivery into enterprise DMS systems like iManage and NetDocuments — they don't do AI deadline extraction, human review workflows, or dependent triggers. If a firm mentions PacerPro, the right framing is: PacerPro gets your documents to the right folder. DockItFlo reads those documents and tells you what to do about them. For the 2–50 attorney firm, PacerPro is overkill on the document side and leaves the deadline management problem entirely unsolved.
“We're a small firm — is this too much software for us?”
DockItFlo is built specifically for small firms. Setup is 2 minutes per attorney. The interface is designed for a single legal support professional to run the entire workflow. You don't need a docketing department to use it — you need one person with 15 minutes in the morning. The product scales up with your firm but it works just as well at 3 attorneys as it does at 30.
“What's the ROI story?”
Three numbers make the case. One: manual notice processing at a 5-attorney firm costs an estimated $9,000–$18,000/year in staff time. DockItFlo at current pricing is a fraction of that. Two: one missed filing deadline in federal court — the attorney time, opposing counsel's motion, potential sanctions, client conversation — costs more than a year of DockItFlo subscriptions before lunch. Three: dependent deadline triggers catch the category of deadline that manual processes almost always miss and that no competitor handles. The risk reduction story is at least as strong as the efficiency story.
“How does pricing compare to competitors?”
DockItFlo is priced per attorney per month with AI included. CourtDrive's AI tier runs approximately $47/attorney/month for a 3-user bundle. DocketBird runs $25–30/seat/month for the base, plus $3.99/calendar/month for AI calendaring. DockItFlo is meaningfully less expensive than both at every firm size — roughly 40–65% less than CourtDrive Elite and 30–45% less than DocketBird all-in — with more features, particularly on the review workflow and dependent deadline side.
“We'll want Clio integration before we can fully commit.”
Clio integration is on the roadmap and in active scoping. When it ships, confirmed deadlines will push directly into the matching Clio matter as calendar entries or tasks — no double entry. Filevine integration is also in scoping. If Clio is a blocker, the right conversation is timeline and whether a pilot period with manual calendar sync is workable in the interim.

State court compatibility

Does DockItFlo work with state court notices?
Yes, for state courts that send email notifications when documents are filed. DockItFlo uses a unique intake email address per attorney. If your state's e-filing system allows attorneys to add a secondary notification email address, you can add DockItFlo's intake email the same way you add it in PACER for federal cases. Notices then flow into DockItFlo automatically and are processed for deadline extraction. The most widely compatible state systems are those using Tyler Technologies' Odyssey platform, which covers courts in Texas, Illinois, California, Georgia, Indiana, Minnesota, Maryland, Oregon, Washington, and more than twenty other states.
Which states work with DockItFlo today?
Any state using Tyler Technologies' Odyssey e-filing platform is compatible with DockItFlo's intake email model today. This includes Texas, Illinois, California (most counties), Georgia, Indiana, Minnesota, Maryland, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, North Carolina (major counties), Iowa, Utah, Colorado, Kansas, Kentucky, and Tennessee. Tyler reports that Odyssey serves more than 100 million US residents across 600+ counties. For states with other e-filing systems (New York's NYSCEF, New Jersey's eCourts, Florida's e-filing portal, and others), compatibility depends on whether the system allows secondary notification email addresses — contact your state court's e-filing support to confirm.
How do I set up DockItFlo for state courts?
The setup process is the same as for federal courts. Log into your state's e-filing portal (eFileTexas, eFile Illinois, Odyssey File & Serve, mncourts.gov, and so on), navigate to your account notification settings, and add your DockItFlo intake email address as a secondary notification recipient. Choose to receive notifications for all cases or specific cases. The DockItFlo intake email for each attorney is shown in the Lawyers tab of your firm's DockItFlo account.
Does DockItFlo apply federal rules (FRCP) to state court deadlines?
No. DockItFlo's FRCP rules engine — which auto-suggests deadlines based on federal procedural rules — only applies to federal court notices. State court notices are processed for date extraction only. The system detects whether a notice is from a federal or state court automatically and handles it accordingly. State procedural rules vary by state and are significantly more complex to automate. State-specific rules engines are a planned future feature.
Are state court notices processed differently than federal notices?
For deadline extraction, the process is identical: DockItFlo reads the full text of the notice and any attached PDFs, extracts dates and deadlines, routes high-confidence items to the calendar, and sends uncertain items to your review queue. The key differences are: the FRCP rules engine does not fire on state notices (no federal rule-based suggestions); state notices are labeled with a “State court notice” indicator in the inbox and review queue so your team has context; and accuracy of date extraction may vary more for state notices than federal ones initially, since state notice formats are less standardized. Accuracy improves as more state notices flow through the system.
What if DockItFlo can't identify whether a notice is from a state or federal court?
Occasionally a notice may arrive from an unfamiliar system that DockItFlo cannot automatically classify. These notices are labeled “Court type unknown” and flagged for your team's attention. Your legal support team can verify the source and confirm the extracted dates as usual — unknown notices are never auto-assigned to the calendar without human review. The FRCP rules engine is suppressed on unknown notices for safety, since applying federal rules to a state matter would be wrong.
My state court notice arrived but the PDF attachment isn't showing. Why?
State court systems handle PDF attachments differently. Some attach PDFs directly to the notification email. Others include a link that must be clicked to download the PDF. A few require logging into the court portal to retrieve the document. If your state's system sends a document link rather than an attachment, DockItFlo will attempt to follow that link automatically when the notice arrives. If the link requires portal authentication, DockItFlo cannot retrieve the document without additional configuration — contact support if you're consistently seeing missing PDFs from a specific state court.
Will DockItFlo eventually suggest deadlines under state procedural rules?
It's on the roadmap, but no firm timeline yet. State procedural rules vary significantly by jurisdiction and the build for each state is its own project. Today the FRCP rules engine covers 45 federal triggers across pleadings, discovery, motions, judgment, and appeals — for federal cases only. For state matters, DockItFlo extracts dates that appear explicitly in the notice and attached documents and routes them through the same review workflow used for federal notices. When state rules engines arrive, they will be released state by state and behave the same way: AI-suggested deadlines surfaced as rules-based suggestions in the review queue, with citations to the relevant state rule and local-rule warnings where applicable.

Still have questions?

Schedule a demo and we’ll walk through DockItFlo with real scheduling order data so you can see exactly what it does before committing.

Schedule a demo