Judge orders patent attorneys to explain incorrect legal citations hallucinated by AI
Briefly

Judge orders patent attorneys to explain incorrect legal citations hallucinated by AI
"These defects include: (1) nonexistent quotations; (2) nonexistent and incorrect citations; and (3) misrepresentations about cited authority."
"admitting to playing a role in submitting the defective citations"
A federal judge ordered attorneys representing a patent licensing company to explain why they should not be sanctioned for filing briefs with nonexistent and incorrect legal citations generated by AI. The firms involved represent Lexos Media IP in an infringement suit against Overstock.com and were given a deadline to describe their roles in drafting, reviewing, and filing the briefs. The judge identified defects including nonexistent quotations, incorrect citations, and misrepresentations about cited authority. One attorney submitted a declaration admitting involvement and stating the incorrect citations originated from AI-generated research that was not independently verified.
Read at ABA Journal
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]