E.D. Tex.: E.D. Tex. General Order 25-07, Amending Local Rules CV-11(g) and AT-3(m): Gene…

What the rule requires

The Eastern District of Texas issued General Order 25-07 on October 31, 2025, amending Local Civil Rule CV-11(g) effective December 1, 2025. The amendment is district-wide and binds all litigants, attorneys and pro se. The operative text reads:

All litigants remain responsible for the accuracy and quality of legal documents produced with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence technology. Litigants are cautioned that certain generative artificial intelligence technologies may produce factually or legally inaccurate content. If a litigant chooses to employ generative artificial intelligence technology, the litigant continues to be bound by the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 and must review and verify all content to ensure that it complies with all such standards.

The same order amended Local Rule AT-3(m), the attorney standard of practice, “for uniformity”: a lawyer who employs generative artificial intelligence technology “must review and verify all content to ensure that it complies with all such standards.”

Three things to note:

1. No mandatory disclosure. Unlike the Florida circuit-level orders or Judge Baylson’s E.D. Pa. standing order, E.D. Tex. CV-11(g) does not require attorneys to disclose AI use in filings. The rule’s enforcement mechanism is Rule 11.
2. No prescribed certification. No certification block is required.
3. Scope expansion in 2025. Before this amendment, the local rule applied only to pro se litigants. As of December 1, 2025, it applies to all litigants, including represented parties.

Why this matters in patent/IP practice

E.D. Tex. is one of the most active patent venues in the federal system. The 2025 amendment putting attorneys on Rule 11 notice for AI-assisted work product is particularly relevant for IP litigators, where claim construction briefs, infringement contentions, and expert reports are often AI-assisted at the drafting stage. The rule does not require disclosure, but it does mean that any hallucinated citation reaching an E.D. Tex. court will face Rule 11 sanctions exposure independent of any chambers-specific rule.

Practitioner workflow

E.D. Tex. matters: no disclosure block required; no certification required. Firms documenting compliance may wish to record internal verification steps for AI-assisted briefs and confirm that their Rule 11 sign-off process covers AI-generated content. The verification standard is the same as for any other unverified source: read the cited authority before relying on it.

Scope

District-wide. CV-11(g) is a Local Civil Rule and applies to civil filings. For criminal cases, Local Rule CR-49(a) provides that “[a]ll pleadings and documents submitted in criminal cases must conform to the filing, service, and format requirements contained in Local Rules CV-5, CV-10, and CV-11”; the rule does not say whether CV-11(g) is among those requirements. Separately, Local Rule AT-3(m) places the same review-and-verify duty on attorneys, whatever the type of case.

Primary source

GO 25-07 (PDF): https://txed.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/goFiles/GO%2025-07%20Amending%20Local%20Rules.pdf