Five analytically notable features. (1) Terminal disable — seventh in the dataset. Extends the terminal-close cluster documented in PA-2026-0014, -0024, -0036, -0040, -0041, and -0043. Enforcement notice language is textually identical across all seven cases: 'You cannot request another review of this decision' — confirming a single template for this disposition type. (2) 'Still doesn't follow' phrasing — third occurrence. PA-2026-0041 established it as a template phrase for post-review terminals under 'fraud and deception'; PA-2026-0043 showed it also applies under 'account integrity.' PA-2026-0045 is the second account integrity + 'still doesn't follow' combination. Notably, unlike PA-2026-0041 (two documented successful appeals) and PA-2026-0043 (prior review implied), the reporter's X letter treats this as an initial suspension with no described prior enforcement cycle — meaning the 'still' likely refers to an internal review not surfaced to the user as a visible enforcement action, consistent with the phantom review mechanism documented in PA-2026-0012. (3) Account integrity catch-all — thirteenth record. Policy now applies across photography/advocacy, cosplay, financial trading, Pakistani-diaspora personal, photography, verified X user, 18-year-old Facebook, three-account cascade primary, high-follower content creator, artist re-suspended after restoration, long-tenure terminally disabled account, X-verified ban method reporter, and now a Gujarat-region Instagram creator. Cross-account-type application continues to hold. See [[finding___enforcement-notice-policy-opacity]]. (4) Independent brigading self-attribution — second in the dataset. Reporter writes 'I feel it may have been affected due to multiple reports' — hedged but explicit attribution to coordinated false reporting, delivered in a formal letter to Meta. Analytically distinct from PA-2026-0044: @MatthewMades was the documented source of the ban method; @Jaswant_sau has no known connection to the ban method discourse or attacker channels. The convergence of independent brigading attributions from two reporters — one an investigative source, one an ordinary creator — corroborates the mechanism from separate source types without either confirming the other. The reporter's hedging ('I feel it may have been affected') is consistent with noticing suspicious activity rather than direct knowledge of coordination. Not a confirmed brigading case; a second independent reporter-attributed case. See [[finding___false-report-brigading-as-weapon]]. (5) India/South Asia geographic concentration — eighth record. Gujarat license plate (GJ prefix) visible in profile photo indicates Gujarat, India-based reporter. Joins PA-2026-0021, -0023, -0025, -0027, -0035, -0039, -0043 in the India/South Asia cluster. Reporter's X post tags Adam Mosseri and Meta Business Support AI — consistent with India-based reporters escalating through social media channels in the absence of enforceable escalation paths (GAC is an alternative; not referenced here). Social-media-as-appeal-channel is structurally distinct from any in-platform appeal mechanism; the terminal disable closes in-platform review but does not prevent external escalation attempts.