N.D. Cal.: Civility and Professionalism Standing Order Section VII: Use of AI (Cases Assi…
Judge Trina L. Thompson · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Verified September 28, 2026
- Citation
- Civility and Professionalism Standing Order Section VII: Use of AI (Cases Assigned to Judge Thompson)
- Order date
- August 18, 2025
Summary
'Use of ChatGPT or other such AI tools is not prohibited, but counsel must personally confirm for themselves the accuracy of any research conducted by these means, and counsel alone bears ethical responsibility for all statements made in filings.'
What does the order require?
- 'Use of ChatGPT or other such AI tools is not prohibited, but counsel must personally confirm for themselves the accuracy of any research conducted by these means, and counsel alone bears ethical responsibility for all statements made in filings.'
- 'Failure to exercise due care in reviewing and filing work product created with the assistance of AI tools may result in sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 or expose counsel to disciplinary action.'
- 'Any billing statements submitted for review of the Court must indicate AI usage when applicable.'
- Cites ABA Resolution 604 (2024) on responsible AI use and, for billing, ABA Model Rule 1.5 and ABA Formal Opinion 512 (2024).
Practice areas: federal civil
What the order requires
Section VII of Judge Trina L. Thompson’s Standing Order on Civility and Professionalism, dated August 18, 2025, addresses the use of artificial intelligence. It warns that AI tools may produce “misrepresentation and fabricated caselaw” and that “Counsel is responsible for providing the Court with complete and accurate representations of the record, procedural history, and cited legal authorities.”
AI use is permitted: “Use of ChatGPT or other such AI tools is not prohibited, but counsel must personally confirm for themselves the accuracy of any research conducted by these means, and counsel alone bears ethical responsibility for all statements made in filings.” The section cites ABA Resolution 604 (2024) and warns that “Failure to exercise due care in reviewing and filing work product created with the assistance of AI tools may result in sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 or expose counsel to disciplinary action.”
Billing statements
The section’s one disclosure duty concerns fees: “Any billing statements submitted for review of the Court must indicate AI usage when applicable,” citing ABA Model Rule 1.5 and ABA Formal Opinion 512 (2024). Briefs and other filings need no AI statement.
Enforcement
Section VIII of the standing order lists the sanctions available for violations, including admonishment on the record, monetary sanctions under Rule 11 or the court’s inherent powers, revocation of pro hac vice status, and referral to the court’s Standing Committee on Professional Conduct.