In re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction Litigation

What the court wrote

Verbatim from the court's document (public domain). Ellipses mark omitted text; nothing is paraphrased.

9 based on a lack of reliable methodology or on hearsay grounds. 10 3. AI-Generated Citations 11 Defendants contend that Osborne admitted at deposition that articles upon which he 12 purportedly relied do not exist, and that other incorrect citations were miscites generated by AI. 13 Plaintiffs respond that none of the academic articles were actually false, but rather that citations 14 were merely incorrectly formatted based on use of an AI citation tool, which was subsequently 15 corrected. The Court declines to exclude Osborne’s opinions on this basis. Defendants may, 16 however, raise the issue on cross-examination. 4. Not Qualified to Offer Opinions about Platform Design and Scientific 17 Literature on Social Media 18 Defendants maintain that Osborne’s conclusions that social media has adverse mental 19 health effects on youth, and that platforms are engineered to maximize attention, are outside of his