Rossi

``` docker exec -it cl-django python /opt/courtlistener/manage.py cl_back_scrape_opinions --courts juriscraper.opinions.united_states.state.nc --backscrape-start=2020 --backscrape-end=2021 docker exec -it cl-django python /opt/courtlistener/manage.py cl_back_scrape_opinions --courts juriscraper.opinions.united_states.state.ncctapp --backscrape-start=2020 --backscrape-end=2022 ```

### nc For the identified gap, we now have 67 documents, up from 0 However, the backscrape has created some duplicates. For each year, it saved ALL records available. For...

This is indeed an enhancement we've been tracking for months. The OpinionCluster model has a one-to-many relation to the Opinion model, so it is what we should be doing. However,...

To actually return and use OpinionClusters, we will indeed need a different approach both in juriscraper and courtlistener, and that's not ready yet It seems there were no conflicts, I...

@flooie I updated the PR with the suggested changes; also added support for getting "per_curiam"

I have put the backscraper on the same file as the scraper, even when it targets a different source. After finishing it, I actually think the backscraper should be on...

Just updated this to account for some edge cases, please check again @flooie

Well, after debugging in integration with Courtlistener, just found a bug that causes `extract_from_text` from any scraper in the `united_states_backscraper` folder to never be used https://github.com/freelawproject/courtlistener/issues/4193 Will have to solve...

Commands to fill the gaps: ``` docker exec -it cl-django python /opt/courtlistener/manage.py cl_back_scrape_opinions --courts juriscraper.opinions.united_states.state.conn --backscrape-start=2022 --backscrape-end=2023 ```

The PR in progress is also trying to solve an index error on `conn` as seen here Sentry Issue: [COURTLISTENER-7TF](https://freelawproject.sentry.io/issues/5567896006/?referrer=github_integration)