D. Ariz.: Preliminary Order: Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Judge Krissa M. L…
Hon. Krissa M. Lanham, U.S. District Judge · U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Verified September 28, 2026
- Citation
- Preliminary Order: Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Judge Krissa M. Lanham, D. Ariz.)
- Order date
- March 30, 2026
Summary
'Any party that uses generative artificial intelligence ("generative AI") in connection with filings in this matter must attach to the subject filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of generative AI and certifying that the filer, in the exercise of the filer's independent judgment, has personally reviewed and verified the content of the filing as accurate and in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.'
What does the order require?
- 'Any party that uses generative artificial intelligence ("generative AI") in connection with filings in this matter must attach to the subject filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of generative AI and certifying that the filer, in the exercise of the filer's independent judgment, has personally reviewed and verified the content of the filing as accurate and in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.'
- 'The declaration must identify which, if any, portion of the filing incorporates Generative AI outputs.'
- 'Any party who presents to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper incorporating inaccurate or undeclared generative AI outputs, including but not limited to inaccurate or non-existent case citations, may be subject to sanctions without further warning.'
- Generative AI 'refers to large language models that accept user input and generate new content' and includes 'the tools available through ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, DeepSeek, Google Gemini, and Grok.'
Practice areas: federal civil
What the order requires
Judge Krissa M. Lanham’s Preliminary Order, a template posted among her orders on the court’s website, includes a section on the use of generative artificial intelligence:
“Any party that uses generative artificial intelligence (“generative AI”) in connection with filings in this matter must attach to the subject filing a separate declaration disclosing the use of generative AI and certifying that the filer, in the exercise of the filer’s independent judgment, has personally reviewed and verified the content of the filing as accurate and in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. The declaration must identify which, if any, portion of the filing incorporates Generative AI outputs.”
The same language appears in Judge Lanham’s screening order in Williams v. Crystal Springs Apartments, LLC (D. Ariz. Mar. 30, 2026), which is tracked as a case.
Sanctions
“Any party who presents to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper incorporating inaccurate or undeclared generative AI outputs, including but not limited to inaccurate or non-existent case citations, may be subject to sanctions without further warning.”
Definition
Generative AI “refers to large language models that accept user input and generate new content,” and “includes, but is not limited to, the tools available through ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, DeepSeek, Google Gemini, and Grok.”
Primary source
How this order changed
Dated record of this order's own lifecycle. Where it was amended or withdrawn, the badge shows its standing after that step.
- activeThe same declaration requirement, the six-tool definition, and the sanctions-without-warning sentence appear in Judge Lanham's screening order in Williams v. Crystal Springs Apartments, LLC (ECF 9, dated March 30, 2026), directed to the plaintiffs in that case. source
- activeThe requirement is posted as a standing section of Judge Lanham's Preliminary Order template on the court's website.