Pennsylvania · federal district court
Standing Order Re: Artificial Intelligence in Cases Assigned to Judge Baylson
An attorney or self-represented party who used AI in preparing any paper filed in a case assigned to this judge must disclose that use in a clear and plain factual statement, and certify that every citation to the law or to the record has been verified as accurate.
Tracker entry · Pennsylvania
- Court. U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Judge Michael M. Baylson)COURT
- Level. federal district courtLEVEL
- Date. 6 June 2023DATED
- What it requires. disclosure, certificationREQUIRES
- Source. Read the documentSOURCE
Last checked · we opened the source on that day and drew the requirement above from its text.
This is one of the earliest judge-level orders in the country, entered in June 2023, and it is one page long. It applies to any complaint, answer, motion, brief or other paper filed in a case assigned to the judge.
The order asks for two separate things, and the second is the harder one. The disclosure is a factual statement that AI was used. The certification is that each citation to the law or to the record in that paper has been verified as accurate, which is a statement about work the filer actually did, not about the tool.
This entry is descriptive, not legal advice. It records what one document says. Read the order that governs your own division before you rely on any of it, and check whether it has changed since the date above.
Back to every jurisdiction in the tracker, or readhow to check an AI citation before you file.