Valve Corporation v. Rothschild
U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington, at Seattle · W.D. Wash. · Washington bar guidance
Verified May 14, 2026
- Citation
- Valve Corp. v. Rothschild, No. 2:23-cv-01016-JNW, 2026 WL 353172 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 9, 2026)
- Decided
- February 9, 2026
Summary
Defendants' Daubert motion (Dkt. No. 136) contained fabricated case citations, nonexistent quotations, and fake quotes attributed to Valve's expert reports. Defendants' counsel acknowledged that a contract attorney used AI in preparing the brief, but the corrected brief at Dkt. No. 167-3 still appeared to contain errors. Judge Jamal N. Whitehead ordered Defendants' lead counsel, Joseph J. Zito of DNL Zito, to show cause why Rule 11 sanctions should not issue.
- AI tool:
- Unspecified generative AI
What sanction did the court impose?
Order to show cause directed at lead counsel Joseph J. Zito, requiring a sworn declaration within 21 days addressing: (a) which AI tools were used and whether protective-order materials were submitted to any AI platform, (b) any remaining inaccurate citations in the corrected brief, (c) supervisory procedures over the contract attorney, and (d) measures implemented to prevent AI-generated content from being submitted in future filings. No monetary sanction was imposed at this stage.
Why does Valve Corporation v. Rothschild matter for law firms using AI?
For managing partners, the Valve order is notable because the misconduct was outsourced. Lead counsel did not run the AI tool; a contract attorney did, and the firm’s supervision and verification workflow did not catch fabricated citations and fake expert-report quotes before two successive filings. The show-cause order targets supervisory procedures and AI-use policy as squarely as it targets the citations themselves, a useful signal for firms documenting reasonable-supervision controls over contract and temporary lawyers using generative AI.
Sources
Primary sources
Further reading
Source PDF is a Westlaw printout mirrored from the Damien Charlotin hallucination database. We are working to add the underlying court docket (PACER, CourtListener, or court website) as a second source.