S.D.N.Y.: Individual Rules of Practice, Section 12 (Artificial Intelligence) (Judge Cathy…
Judge Cathy Seibel · U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
Verified October 1, 2026
- Citation
- Individual Rules of Practice, Section 12 (Artificial Intelligence) (Judge Cathy Seibel, S.D.N.Y.)
- Order date
- September 15, 2026
Summary
'Although the use of ChatGPT and other such generative artificial intelligence ("AI") tools is not prohibited, unqualified reliance on such tools may result in filings containing fabricated, inaccurate or misleading case citations, quotations and/or propositions.'
What does the order require?
- 'Although the use of ChatGPT and other such generative artificial intelligence ("AI") tools is not prohibited, unqualified reliance on such tools may result in filings containing fabricated, inaccurate or misleading case citations, quotations and/or propositions.'
- '[F]ailure to exercise due care in reviewing and filing work product created with the assistance of generative AI or similar tools may violate Rule 11 and other applicable standards of practice and expose the filer to sanctions or other corrective or disciplinary action.'
- 'In short, any attorney or pro se party using AI must verify the accuracy of each proposition, quotation and citation by reference to the actual case.'
- No disclosure of AI use is required.
Practice areas: federal civil
What the rule requires
Section 12 of Judge Cathy Seibel’s Individual Rules of Practice (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 15, 2026) addresses artificial intelligence. It does not prohibit ChatGPT or other generative AI tools, but warns that “unqualified reliance on such tools may result in filings containing fabricated, inaccurate or misleading case citations, quotations and/or propositions.”
The section ties AI use to Rule 11’s reasonable-inquiry duty: failure to exercise due care in reviewing and filing AI-assisted work product “may violate Rule 11 and other applicable standards of practice and expose the filer to sanctions or other corrective or disciplinary action.” It then states the step directly: “any attorney or pro se party using AI must verify the accuracy of each proposition, quotation and citation by reference to the actual case.”
The rule requires no disclosure of AI use and prescribes no certification.
Related rules
Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker’s Use of Generative AI rule in the same district uses nearly identical Rule 11 language, without Seibel’s final verification sentence.
Quotable language
“In short, any attorney or pro se party using AI must verify the accuracy of each proposition, quotation and citation by reference to the actual case.”
Primary source
Individual Rules of Practice (Seibel, J.), September 15, 2026 (PDF), nysd.uscourts.gov