In re Asbury Automotive Group, Inc.
Federal Trade Commission, Office of Administrative Law Judges · FTC ALJ
Conduct
ALJ's scheduling order made every filing a deemed certification that no text was AI-drafted or that AI-drafted text was checked.
Consequence
No sanction; a filing that fails to comply with the certification may be stricken.
Lesson
FTC administrative proceedings can carry AI certifications in the scheduling order; read its Additional Provisions before the first filing.
Verified September 30, 2026
- Citation
- In re Asbury Automotive Group, Inc., FTC Docket No. 9436, Scheduling Order ¶ 5 (Sept. 13, 2024) (Ayoubi, ALJ)
- Decided
- September 13, 2024
Summary
In the scheduling order for FTC Docket No. 9436, Administrative Law Judge Dania L. Ayoubi included a generative AI certification in the order's Additional Provisions (paragraph 5). By signing and presenting a filing, an attorney or pro se litigant certifies either that no portion of the filing was drafted by generative AI, or that any AI-drafted language was checked for accuracy by human attorneys or paralegals using printed legal reporters and/or online legal databases. No AI misuse was at issue; the order sets a prospective requirement for filings in this proceeding.
- AI tool:
- Generative AI generally; the order names ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Harvey.AI, and Google Gemini as examples
How did the court address the AI-related conduct?
Filings that fail to comply with the certification requirement "may be stricken on that ground." Judge Ayoubi's four revised scheduling orders (March 28, June 18, August 21, and December 10, 2025) each state that the Additional Provisions of the September 13, 2024 order remain in effect. Beginning October 29, 2024, the Commission granted a series of the parties' joint motions to continue and stay the proceeding, and on September 3, 2026 it withdrew the matter from adjudication for 60 days to consider its resolution.
Why does In re Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. matter for law firms using AI?
The order
Administrative Law Judge Dania L. Ayoubi entered the scheduling order in In re Asbury Automotive Group, Inc. (FTC Docket No. 9436) on September 13, 2024. Paragraph 5 of its Additional Provisions reads:
By signing and presenting a pleading, written motion, or other filing, an attorney or pro se litigant certifies that either: (1) no portion of the filing was drafted by generative artificial intelligence (“AI”) (such as ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Harvey.AI, or Google Gemini), or (2) any language in the filing that was drafted by generative AI was checked for accuracy by human attorneys or paralegals using printed legal reporters and/or online legal databases. Any filing that fails to comply with these mandatory certification requirements may be stricken on that ground.
The certification is made by signing: the filer does not state which of the two options applies, so the order does not require disclosure of whether AI was used. The second option does describe how AI-drafted language is to be checked.
Procedural posture
Judge Ayoubi’s revised scheduling orders of March 28, June 18, August 21, and December 10, 2025 each state that the Additional Provisions of the September 13, 2024 order “remain in effect” (see the Fourth Revised Scheduling Order). The Commission continued the proceeding by four months on October 29, 2024 on the parties’ joint motion and later granted further stays and continuances on their joint motions. On September 3, 2026, it withdrew the matter from adjudication for 60 days “for the purpose of considering the proper resolution of this matter.” The full docket is on the FTC’s case page.
Related FTC practice
The FTC’s other Administrative Law Judge, Jay L. Himes, uses nearly the same two options in orders entered in five unrelated proceedings, but requires the filer to state one of them in the certificate of service. That practice is tracked as a court order: Generative AI Certification in the Certificate of Service (ALJ Himes).
Primary source
Sources
Primary sources
- Government primary source
- Government primary source
- Government primary source
- Government primary source
- Government primary source
- Government primary source
- Government primary source
- Only one docket was found in which an order signed by Judge Ayoubi contains the AI certification. Her three orders in In the Matter of Erin Thompson (Docket No. 9453; July 10, July 27, and August 14, 2026) contain no AI text. In that docket, the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority's August 10, 2026 filing includes a similar statement in its certificate of service, but no order requiring it was found. Orders she may have entered in other dockets were not all reviewed.