E.D. Pa.: Practices and Procedures, Section D: Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence…

What the rule requires

Section D of Magistrate Judge Arteaga’s practices and procedures applies to “any attorney for a party or any pro se party who uses generative artificial intelligence (‘A.I.’) to prepare any complaint, answer, motion, brief, or other paper filed with the Court in a matter assigned to Judge Arteaga.” That filer “shall”:

1. “disclose that generative artificial intelligence was used to prepare the filing;”
2. “identify precisely what portion or portions of the document contain the generated content;”
3. “identify the specific tool used and how it was used; and”
4. “certify that each and every citation to the law or the record in the filing was verified as accurate in accordance with the obligations set forth in Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”

How demanding it is

This is among the more detailed disclosure rules on the federal bench. A bare statement that AI was used does not satisfy it: the filing must say which portions contain generated content, name the tool, and say how it was used. The citation certification reaches citations “to the law or the record,” so record cites in a fact section are covered as well as case law.

Consequences

“Failure to comply with this policy may result in consequences such as referral to the appropriate state bar, monetary sanctions, or any other sanction the Court deems appropriate.”

Other E.D. Pa. chambers rules

Judge Arteaga’s rule sits alongside other chambers-level AI rules in the district, including Judge Baylson’s. Each binds only matters assigned to that judge.

Primary source

Practices and Procedures of Magistrate Judge José Raúl Arteaga, Section D (PDF)