S.D. Tex. (Laredo Division): Court Procedures in Civil Cases, Section 8: Use of Generativ…
Judge John A. Kazen · U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Verified September 30, 2026
- Citation
- Court Procedures in Civil Cases, Section 8: Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Judge John A. Kazen)
- Order date
- April 2026
Summary
'Attorneys and self-represented litigants must ensure that any filing prepared with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence (e.g. ChatGPT, Harvey.AI, or similar tools), is thoroughly reviewed for factual and legal accuracy prior to submission.'
What does the order require?
- 'Attorneys and self-represented litigants must ensure that any filing prepared with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence (e.g. ChatGPT, Harvey.AI, or similar tools), is thoroughly reviewed for factual and legal accuracy prior to submission.'
- 'All counsel and pro se parties are reminded that, consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, the person signing any pleading, motion, or other paper remains fully responsible for its content, regardless of whether it was drafted in whole or in part by generative AI.'
- 'The Court will not accept the excuse that such content was prepared by AI, staff, or others when assessing potential violations of Rule 11 or applicable ethical obligations.'
- Attorneys are reminded of the duty of candor to the tribunal (Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 3.03(a)) and of technological competence (Rule 1.01, comment 8).
- 'The Court adopts and incorporates by reference Chief Judge Randy Crane's General Order 2025-04 on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Court Filings.'
- General Order 2025-04 cites Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c), describing it in a parenthetical as 'providing for imposition of an "appropriate sanction"' and listing 'nonmonetary directives, a penalty payable to the court, or payment to the opposing party of attorney's fees and expenses directly resulting from the violation'. Rule 11(c)(4) itself allows a fee award only to the movant, on motion, and only where warranted for effective deterrence.
Practice areas: federal civil
What the procedures require
Section 8 of Judge John A. Kazen’s Court Procedures in Civil Cases (updated April 2026) addresses generative AI. Attorneys and self-represented litigants “must ensure that any filing prepared with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence (e.g. ChatGPT, Harvey.AI, or similar tools), is thoroughly reviewed for factual and legal accuracy prior to submission.” The section adds that “consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, the person signing any pleading, motion, or other paper remains fully responsible for its content, regardless of whether it was drafted in whole or in part by generative AI,” and that the Court “will not accept the excuse that such content was prepared by AI, staff, or others when assessing potential violations of Rule 11 or applicable ethical obligations.”
The section incorporates Chief Judge Randy Crane’s General Order 2025-04, which points to the sanctions available under Rule 11(c) (nonmonetary directives, a penalty paid into court, or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective deterrence, an award of the movant’s attorney’s fees and expenses), and reminds attorneys of their duties of candor and technological competence under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct.
Relationship to the criminal procedures
Section 7 of Judge Kazen’s criminal procedures (updated June 23, 2025) carries the same review requirement; the civil version ties the signer’s responsibility expressly to Rule 11, where the criminal version relies on the court’s inherent authority.
Primary source
Court Procedures in Civil Cases, updated April 2026 (PDF); Judge Kazen’s page