N.D. Ill.: Case Management Procedures, AI Provision (Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman, N.D. I…

What the order requires

Judge Coleman’s case management procedures contain the strictest AI rule documented in N.D. Ill.: a flat prohibition on using AI to draft memoranda or cite AI as authority for motions. The rule does not permit AI use with disclosure or verification; it bars use entirely. The rule’s text uses “Artificial Intelligence” without a “generative” qualifier, sweeping any AI-assisted drafting (including non-generative tools).

Coleman has enforced this rule in subsequent sanctions opinions, including Shanmugavelandy v. AbbVie (June 2025 and September 2025), which sanctioned counsel under both the prohibition and Rule 11. The continued enforcement signals the rule is not aspirational; it is the operative authority for any party appearing before Judge Coleman.

Why this matters

Coleman’s prohibition is the strict end of the spectrum compared to other federal AI rules. Most chambers rules permit AI use with disclosure and verification (Mehalchick template in M.D. Pa., Blumenfeld template in C.D. Cal.); a few use Rule 11 cautionary framing without disclosure mandate (Hodge in E.D. Pa., Robinson in S.D. Cal., Johnston in N.D. Ill.). Coleman is the only documented federal judge to flatly prohibit AI use in memoranda and citations.

For N.D. Ill. practitioners, the rule means firms must affirmatively avoid AI tools (including drafting assistants like Westlaw AI and CoCounsel) when preparing materials for Coleman’s chambers, regardless of whether the firm has its own internal AI use protocols. Compliance is a binary go/no-go, not a disclosure-and-verification protocol.

Quotable language

“Parties may not use Artificial Intelligence to draft their memoranda or as authority to support their motions.”

Primary source

Judge Coleman’s Case Management Procedures (AI provision), ilnd.uscourts.gov