What does N.D. Cal.'s AI court order require?

AI use is not categorically prohibited. The Court will impute any errors by computer-based tools to the attorney or unrepresented party whose signature appears on the document containing those errors.

Does this order require attorneys to disclose AI use?

The order does not require disclosure or certification, but cautions counsel that Rule 11 (or analogous duties) applies to unverified AI content.

What are the consequences for attorneys who violate this order?

The order specifies sanctions, fees, or duties imposed on counsel personally for noncompliance, which may include disclosure to opposing counsel, mandatory CLE, monetary sanctions, or other measures at the court's discretion.

N.D. Cal.: Civil Standing Order: Use of AI (Cases Assigned to Magistrate Judge Cisneros)

Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

active

Verified April 27, 2026

Citation: Civil Standing Order: Use of AI (Cases Assigned to Magistrate Judge Cisneros)
Order date: February 17, 2026

Summary

AI use is not categorically prohibited.

What does the order require?

AI use is not categorically prohibited.
The Court will impute any errors by computer-based tools to the attorney or unrepresented party whose signature appears on the document containing those errors.
Failure to verify the accuracy of briefs, and particularly the accuracy of citations to law and evidence, may be grounds for sanctions and/or striking a filing.

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

Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros’s standing order (effective February 17, 2026) takes a Rule 11 imputation approach: AI is permitted, but any error in an AI-generated portion of a filing is treated as the signing attorney’s error. There is no separate disclosure or certification requirement; the rule is a clarification of how Rule 11 operates with AI-assisted work.

This is one of the simpler N.D. Cal. AI provisions to comply with operationally (no new procedural step at filing time), but the imputation language forecloses the “the AI made it up” excuse that has surfaced in recent sanctions decisions.

Primary source

Standing order: https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/standing-orders/LJC-CivilStandingOrder_2-17-26.pdf

N.D. Cal.: Civil Standing Order: Use of AI (Cases Assigned to Magistrate Judge Cisneros)

Summary

What does the order require?

What the order requires

Primary source

More orders affecting attorneys in this state

Court orders