One red case, start to finish

1. Original input

A red case arrives from an existing EUDR workflow

A supplier record is imported with a flagged exception: “Supplier follow-up required.” The original row is stored exactly as received and is never overwritten — every later correction is a separate, versioned snapshot alongside it.

source_error_code: RM-SUP-001
source_error_message: "Supplier follow-up required —
  rejected during automated validation."
lot_reference: LOT-4471
supplier_name: "Example Supplier B.V."

2. Deterministic findings

RegMend's own validation runs against the same data

Independently of whatever the source platform already found, RegMend's deterministic engine checks the record against its own ruleset — no AI guessing, no invented facts. On this record it found 5 findings: producer information incomplete, producer-to-supplier linkage missing, lot-to-plot linkage missing, product-to-commodity linkage unclear, and no commodity recorded.

5 findings — RM-DATA-003, RM-TRACE-002,
RM-TRACE-001, RM-TRACE-003, (+1 more)

3. Classification

Every case gets a category, severity, and priority

This one is classified Supplier/Data, High severity. Classification happens against a fixed taxonomy — the same seven categories used across every case in the platform (Geolocation, Supplier/Data, Traceability, Evidence, Supplier Follow-up, DDS/System, Escalation) — never an ad hoc label.

4. Supplier / evidence requirement

A specific, narrow request goes to the supplier

An operator sends a secure, single-use link asking for exactly one thing: confirm the producer name and country of origin for this lot. The supplier never gets platform access — just a token-scoped portal for this one request, expiring in 14 days.

5. Remediation proposal

The supplier responds; evidence is attached

The supplier confirms the producer name and country through the secure portal and attaches a supporting document. The response and the evidence file are both recorded, tied to this specific request — never surfaced to any other case or organization.

6. Correction

A reviewed, versioned correction is applied

An operator reviews the supplier's response and evidence, then records the corrected value as a new snapshot. The original snapshot is untouched — anyone can still see exactly what was originally submitted next to what changed and why.

7. Revalidation

The same deterministic engine runs again

With the corrected producer name and country now present, RegMend re-validates. Two of the original five findings clear — producer information is no longer incomplete, and the supplier-to-producer link is no longer missing. Three remain: the lot still has no linked plot geometry, no commodity is recorded, and (in this example) the supplier-provided country value didn't pass ISO format validation on re-check — a genuine data-quality catch, not a rubber stamp.

Findings after correction: 3 (was 5)
Resolved: producer info, supplier↔producer link
Remaining: lot↔plot link, commodity, country format

8. Resolution & Return package

The case closes with an honest status — and a full audit trail

Because real findings remain, this case closes as Resolved with Note, not a bare Resolved — RegMend never claims more certainty than the evidence supports. The customer receives a Return package: the corrected output file, a resolution manifest (root cause, action taken, original vs. corrected value, remaining risk), and an unresolved-items report — every artifact checksummed and downloadable only by an authorized member of the owning organization.