Champagne v. Commissioner of Social Security

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE KATARENA CHAMPAGNE, 9 Plaintiff, Case No. C24-1663-SKV 10 v. ORDER RE: BRIEFING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

14 A preliminary review of the briefing submitted by counsel for Plaintiff raises a concern that it contains unverified generative artificial intelligence (“AI”) outputs. See, e.g., Dkt. 9 at 8 (quoted language does not appear in Edlund v. Massanari, 253 F.3d 1152, 1157 (9th Cir. 2001)).

17 Due to that concern, and with consideration of the issues identified in Mavy v. Comm’r of Soc.

18 Sec. Admin., No. CV-25-00689-PHX-KML (ASB), 2025 WL 2355222 (D. Ariz. Aug. 14, 2025), counsel for Plaintiff is herein ORDERED to re-file Opening and Reply briefs within seven (7) days of the date of this Order. Before re-filing, counsel shall thoroughly review the briefing and correct any hallucinated case citations or quotes and any other AI-related errors. Although the Court does not anticipate that any such corrections would necessitate a response, the Commissioner may, if needed, re-file a Responsive Brief within seven (7) days of the re-filed Opening and Reply briefs. The Court will also entertain any motion by the Commissioner for costs associated with a re-filed Responsive brief.

3 Dated this 2nd day of September, 2025.

A 5 S. KATE VAUGHAN United States Magistrate Judge