C.D. Cal.: Judge's Procedures: Artificial Intelligence Certificate (Judge Otis D. Wright…
Hon. Otis D. Wright II, U.S. District Judge · U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Verified September 29, 2026
- Citation
- Judge's Procedures: Artificial Intelligence Certificate (Judge Otis D. Wright II, C.D. Cal.)
- Order date
- 2026
Summary
'Any memorandum of points and authorities, pretrial brief, trial brief, or posttrial brief must include on the last page of the document a certificate by the attorney or the unrepresented party filing the document that the document complies with the following rule governing use of generative artificial intelligence.'
What does the order require?
- 'Any memorandum of points and authorities, pretrial brief, trial brief, or posttrial brief must include on the last page of the document a certificate by the attorney or the unrepresented party filing the document that the document complies with the following rule governing use of generative artificial intelligence.'
- 'Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a brief, pleading, or other filing must disclose the use of artificial intelligence and certify that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer's Rule 11 obligations.'
- The certificate is 'in substantially the following form': 'The undersigned certifies that this submission ______ does not use _____ uses generative artificial intelligence. If generative artificial intelligence was used, following drafting, I reviewed, revised, and supplemented all portions of the brief, including those that were informed by the use of Artificial Intelligence or based on prior templates. I independently verified the factual and legal accuracy of the content and confirmed that all arguments and authorities were appropriate to the issues presented.'
Practice areas: federal civil
What the procedures require
The procedures posted for Judge Otis D. Wright II on the Central District of California’s Judges’ Procedures and Schedules page include an item headed “Artificial Intelligence.” It requires that “Any memorandum of points and authorities, pretrial brief, trial brief, or posttrial brief must include on the last page of the document a certificate by the attorney or the unrepresented party filing the document that the document complies with the following rule governing use of generative artificial intelligence.”
The rule itself: “Any party who uses generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey, CoCounsel, or Google Bard) to generate any portion of a brief, pleading, or other filing must disclose the use of artificial intelligence and certify that the filer has reviewed the source material and verified that the artificially generated content is accurate and complies with the filer’s Rule 11 obligations.”
The certificate
The certificate must be “in substantially the following form”:
“The undersigned certifies that this submission ______ does not use _____ uses generative artificial intelligence. If generative artificial intelligence was used, following drafting, I reviewed, revised, and supplemented all portions of the brief, including those that were informed by the use of Artificial Intelligence or based on prior templates. I independently verified the factual and legal accuracy of the content and confirmed that all arguments and authorities were appropriate to the issues presented.”
The certificate is required on every listed brief, whether or not AI was used: the filer marks “does not use” or “uses.”
When it began
The page carries no date. In Chaney v. Transdev Services Inc., No. 2:24-cv-10761-ODW, ECF 46 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 28, 2026), Judge Wright noted that the court “did not begin mandating this certification until after” counsel filed oppositions on March 30, 2026, so the requirement took effect between March 30 and April 28, 2026.
Primary source
Sanctions cases decided under this order
Cases in our tracker where this rule appears to have produced or directly informed the sanctions decision.
- Chaney v. Transdev Services Inc. , Apr 2026 ($2,500 payable to the Court ($500 for one use of the fabricated case and $1,000 for each of two more); declaration of the AI use and the bad-faith findings to be filed in every C.D. Cal. case where counsel appears and emailed to every other C.D. Cal. judge's chambers)