Skip to content

Courts on AI / Self-represented litigants using AI

Rhonda L. H.-B. v. Commissioner of Social Security

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · Federal district courts · NY · · No. 26-CV-425 (PAE) (BCM) · order

The Southern District of New York on 2026-04-27 allowed refiling but warned the self-represented plaintiff after AI-like placeholders and repeated nonsensical text appeared in Rhonda L. H.-B. v. Commissioner of Social Security. The self-represented plaintiff filed an opposition with two fabricated or AI-like submission items.

Disposition
The motions to vacate and strike were denied, plaintiff was allowed to replace an overlength AI-generated brief, and she was cautioned to review any AI-assisted filing.
Canonical record
Incident tracker entry — verified outcome, regulator disposition and related rules

What the court wrote

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

and • a 179-page "Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and in Support of Emergency Relief, Mandamus, and Judicial Enforcement. " (Dkt. 40 at 3. ) As discussed in more detail below, portions of plaintiff's papers appear to constitute the unedited output of a generative artificial intelligence (AI) tool. Plaintiff's Motions to Vacate and Strike are Denied Plaintiff's letter-motion to vacate the March 24, 2026 deadline for the Commissioner to file the CAR (Dkt. 19) is DENIED AS MOOT in light of the filing of the Commissioner's Rule 12(b)(1) motion on March 9, 2026. See Supp. Soc.

compiled by the SafeLegalAI editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-08v0.2.2coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub