The Court was informed that the firm’s internal policies governing the use of AI tools were not followed while preparing the motion. The firm also admitted that its standard review process failed to detect the inaccuracies before the document was filed.
Partner Andrew G Dietderich, who wrote the letter, took responsibility for the lapse and apologised on behalf of the firm. He said that the firm was “keenly aware” of its obligation to ensure the accuracy of all court filings. He said,
“I want to assure the Court that the Firm’s policies governing AI use are both clear and rigorous. Access to AI tools is conditioned on completion of mandatory training. Before any Firm lawyer is granted access to generative AI tools, the lawyer must complete two required training modules, completion of which is tracked and verified.”
