ME.12:4.1 - Pattern-Use Unfolding

1. Name the blocked use and possible contradiction. Identify the reader or decision, the claim needed, its qualification window, and what would count as agreement, contradiction, missing information, or a stop. Do not begin with “verify the Method”.
2. Preserve the subject and status branch. Identify the admitted Method under A.3.1, or keep the proposed whole as a candidate account. Keep Work, WorkPlan, description, representation, support, evidence, publication, and structure claims at their current statuses.
3. Recover the maintained claim and owner. Record the claim text or predicate, owning result, edition or occurrence, source or construction basis, intended use, and currentness condition. If ownership cannot be recovered, return owner-not-recoverable before editing several carriers.
4. Check construction claims at ME.7. Test construction requirements, component decisions, operation declarations, and obtaining-relation claims separately. Cite the governing FPF predicate where needed rather than recreating its admission test. A failed construction claim returns to that exact ME.7 result.
5. Check MethodDescription claims at ME.8. Test coverage, internal consistency, correspondence with admitted Method claims, navigation for the named use, stated evidence limits, omissions, stops, and any declared description-side conformance. Do not make section count or scheme passage a proxy for useful coverage.
6. Check representation-use results at the right owner. For one action, recover its complete representation-use result under C.37 and stop without ME.9. For several unlike Method-related actions, recover the complete ME.9 profile, including its shared source and separate cross-use result. Test the contradicted action’s claim group and whether the profile relation still holds. The direct FPF governor owns view, mathematical-lens, publication, and structure conformance; if a governed result fails, return that lower result and reopen only the affected use result and cross-use relations that actually depended on it.
7. Check support results at ME.10. Use ME.10’s result distinctions to locate the specific support claim contradicted by the evidence and the result that owns it. Return the repair there; one defeated claim is not a verdict on the whole support configuration.
8. Use trial evidence to check the maintained claim. From ME.11, recover the actual Work occurrence, performer, enacted admitted Method, situation, capability and support conditions, direct relations, result, burden, observation source, and evidence reach. Ask which named claim the observation bears on. A success or failure does not by itself identify the owner.
9. Classify the finding. Distinguish: agreement-within-window; contradicted-claim; missing-information; failed-declared-conformance; stale-source-or-edition; and owner-not-recoverable. Do not turn uncertainty into contradiction or a local defect into a whole-Method verdict.
10. Select one correction owner. Return the smallest correction to ME.7 construction, ME.8 description, one direct C.37 use row, one complete ME.9 Method representation profile, one exact ME.10 result, or the direct governor of a lower representation result. If one observation defeats several independent claims, create separate findings with separate owners; do not copy one vague correction into every upstream result.
11. Repair and repeat the same check. Preserve unaffected claims, statuses, evidence, and windows. Recheck the repaired claim against the same basis. If the use, subject, source, edition, or criteria changed, start a new coherence use instead of calling the old check passed.
12. Return the bounded result and non-use. State the verified claim, correction or gap, owner, affected downstream uses, preserved claims, and reopen condition. Say explicitly that fit, transfer, worth, capability, contribution, causality, admission, and publication remain separate.