Louis L. Ligon III v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

What the court wrote

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

(FAC ¶ 8. ) Plaintiff received a verification code on May 8 for additional vetting. (FAC ¶ 9. ) On May 9, he created six political ads for his Defendant argues in its reply that Plaintiff’s response should be given little weight because he improperly used artificial intelligence (“AI”) to draft his filing, leading to many misstatements of law. (Def. ’s Reply 2, Dkt. 54. ) The court agrees that the vast majority of Plaintiff’s case citations are cited for legal propositions that the cases themselves do not support, and this impacts how the court weighs his arguments—however, the court declines to independently factor in Plaintiff’s use of AI software when weighing his response, as it does not contain any hallucinated or fabricated citations and there is no need to separately account for his use of AI in considering his arguments. Plaintiff is cautioned, however, that it is his responsibility to ensure that any filings drafted with AI assistance are properly reviewed for accuracy before they are submitted to this court.