June 1, 2026 (in 3 days): New York: 22 NYCRR Part 161 takes effect, system-wide AI policy for all UCS courts

C.D. Cal.: Standing Order for Civil Cases Assigned to Judge Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr.

Judge Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr. · U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

active

Verified May 8, 2026

Citation
Standing Order for Civil Cases Assigned to Judge Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr.
Order date
January 14, 2026

Summary

Any party who uses generative AI (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a brief, pleading, or other filing must attach a separate declaration disclosing the AI use.

What does the order require?

Practice areas: federal civil

Verify this order against the court's official website before relying on it. Standing orders are amended without notice. Requirements vary by judge and case type.

What the order requires

Judge Blumenfeld’s standing order in Section 5(c) requires a separate disclosure declaration whenever generative AI is used to draft any portion of a filing. The declaration must certify that the filer reviewed source material and verified the AI-generated content is accurate. The verification obligation is anchored to Rule 11.

The order names ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, and Google Bard as exemplar tools. Scope is limited to generative AI; non-generative tools (e.g., citation checkers, machine-translation tools used to render foreign-language exhibits) are not addressed.

Pattern note

Three C.D. Cal. judges (Blumenfeld, Hwang, Slaughter) use the same operative template, with Slaughter adding “motion” to the trigger-document list. Olguin uses a different shorter template (filing-as-certification, no separate declaration). Robinson in S.D. Cal. uses a third model (Rule 11 cautionary framing, no disclosure mandate).

Primary source

Standing Order PDF, apps.cacd.uscourts.gov