Does this order require attorneys to disclose AI use?

No affirmative disclosure of AI use is required. The order does require that AI-generated content (citations, quotations, factual assertions) be independently verified for accuracy before filing; the key requirements above state how the order frames that duty and whether any certification accompanies it.

What are the consequences for attorneys who violate this order?

This order provides for consequences imposed on counsel personally for noncompliance. The specific remedies it authorises are set out in the requirements listed on this page; they vary by order and are applied at the court's discretion.

N.D. Cal.: Civil and Discovery Referral Standing Order Section 10: Use of AI (Cases Assig…

Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

active

Verified September 30, 2026

Citation: Civil and Discovery Referral Standing Order Section 10: Use of AI (Cases Assigned to Magistrate Judge van Keulen)
Order date: February 2, 2026

Summary

The signature of counsel or a self-represented party on any submission containing AI-generated content, including citations generated by AI, constitutes a certification that the signing attorney (or self-represented party) has personally verified the content's accuracy.

What does the order require?

The signature of counsel or a self-represented party on any submission containing AI-generated content, including citations generated by AI, constitutes a certification that the signing attorney (or self-represented party) has personally verified the content's accuracy.
The Court will impute any errors by such AI tools to the attorney or party whose signature appears on the document containing those errors.
Counsel is responsible for maintaining records of all prompts or inquiries submitted to any generative AI tools.
Cites Rule 11 and the California Rules of Professional Conduct; lists ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini by name.

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 Susan van Keulen’s civil and discovery referral standing order, Section 10, took effect February 2, 2026. It treats the signature itself as the certification. Signing a filing that contains AI-generated content is itself a representation that the signing attorney has personally verified its accuracy. There is no separate certification block to draft. The order also imputes AI errors to the signer and requires prompt-record retention.

Compared to Lee or Martínez-Olguín, treating the signature as the certification simplifies compliance: no separate certification text to append. The stakes on the signing process are higher, though. Every signature on an AI-touched filing is a verification representation, carrying Rule 11 sanctions exposure for false representations.

Primary source

Standing order: https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/standing-orders/SvK-Civil_and_DiscoveryReferralMatters_StandingOrder-2-2026.pdf

N.D. Cal.: Civil and Discovery Referral Standing Order Section 10: Use of AI (Cases Assig…

Summary

What does the order require?

What the order requires

Primary source

More orders affecting attorneys in this state

Court orders

From the blog