This week’s case teaches litigators and discovery professionals how AI works, and what they need to know to ask for the discovery of AI generated evidence. A Southern District of New York court ordered Perplexity AI to produce snapshots of
Two stipulated orders in the biggest generative AI copyright case in the country set out how to produce subscriber prompts and the images and video they generated: a sample of 385 per character, drawn by a published method anyone can
A Northern District of Indiana court just built a second formula for giving context to short Microsoft Teams messages, a three-day calendar window borrowed from an unrelated case, because neither party gave the Court a workable formula of its own.
A Northern District of California court just denied a bid to force disclosure of how LinkedIn used generative AI to review documents — the contested mirror image of last week’s stipulated AI protocol in James v. Cerebras. The lesson for
An analysis of the Northern District of California’s July 2026 stipulated ESI protocol and companion protective order — the first I’ve seen to govern generative AI as its own category of document review — and what it means for how
A Texas business court held that a company executive’s ChatGPT conversations about his own case are protected work product — then ordered him to identify every produced document he fed into the tool, including material covered by the protective order.
A first-of-its-kind decision out of the District of Connecticut held that AI prompts used by an expert witness are discoverable methodology under Rule 26 — and the district court stayed the order sixteen days later. Every litigator working with experts
A new District of Columbia decision shows how a documented preservation program still produced sanctions, fee-shifting, and adverse jury argument — and why the same reasoning lands harder when the data is text messages, Slack, and Teams instead of email.
When a corporate defendant moved to restrict a pro se plaintiff’s AI use in discovery, the court didn’t just rule on the motion — it wrote the most comprehensive framework on AI and work product protection in federal court yet,
When Google sunset Universal Analytics, the data went with it. A recent Rule 37(e) decision shows what happens when an IT employee tried to preserve litigation data without direction from counsel — and why the consequences went far beyond a
