Regulation Tracker / United States (federal)
General Pretrial and Trial Procedures: Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence
U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey — Judge Evelyn Padin · New Jersey
last revised 2026-05-28last verified 2026-09-061 versioncountry page →
Standing orderIn forceDisclosureCertification
map categories:Disclosure of AI use in filingsDuty to verify AI outputSelf-represented litigants
Unverified: we have not yet opened the official document at the linked address. The record is listed for completeness and excluded from search indexes until confirmed.
Judge Evelyn Padin’s revised May 28, 2026 general pretrial and trial procedures require mandatory certification for any generative AI use in court filings. The certification must state that the GAI work product was diligently reviewed by a human being for accuracy and applicability, including correcting errors and eliminating hallucinations.
- Applies to
- all, litigants
- Effective
- See version history
- Current version
- As posted (undated) · 28 May 2026
- Last verified
- 06 Sept 2026
What the document requires
- All matters pending before Judge Padin, including pro se matters, are covered unless stated otherwise.
- Any GAI use in court filings requires mandatory human-review certification.
- The review should include correcting errors and eliminating hallucinations.
- Noncompliance may lead to sanctions, striking, or bar referral.
Version history
| Version | Date | What changed | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| As posted (undated)current | 2026-05-28 | First version recorded. | official |
Sources
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Legal AI Regulation Tracker, "General Pretrial and Trial Procedures: Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence" (U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey — Judge Evelyn Padin, As posted (undated), 2026-05-28), safelegalai.com/regulation/us-federal/us-njd-padin-2026-gai-human-review-certification (accessed 2026-10-07). Data: CC BY 4.0.
More official documents in United States (federal)
- Notice of Proposed Amendment to Fifth Circuit Rule 32.3 and Form 6 · U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- Court Decision on Proposed Rule Regarding Artificial Intelligence · U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- Risks Associated with the Use of AI Tools to Generate Documents for Filing with the Court · Central District of California
- Standing Order Regarding Newly Assigned Cases · Central District of California (Judge Court)
- Civil Standing Order · Central District of California (Judge Kato)
- Judge’s Procedures: Artificial Intelligence · Central District of California (Judge Oliver)