Proposed A.I. Rule in Eastern District of Michigan

[EDRM Editor’s Note: The opinions and positions are those of Michael Berman.]

Danielle Ferguson reports in Detroit Federal Courts Propose AI Disclosure Rule – Law360 (Dec. 8, 2023), that: “The Eastern District of Michigan published a proposed rule Friday that would require lawyers to disclose any time they use AI to help them with written filings and verify its citations are real….” She adds that the rule “would require that a filer disclose the use of generative AI if it is used to compose or draft any paper presented to the court.” The article provides a brief summary of several rules proposals and standing orders in other jurisdictions. The Eastern District of Michigan is accepting comments through January 19^th. Id.

The Eastern District of Michigan published a proposed rule Friday that would require lawyers to disclose any time they use AI to help them with written filings and verify its citations are real….

The Eastern District of Michigan is accepting comments through January 19^th.
Danielle Ferguson, Detroit Federal Courts Propose AI Disclosure Rule – Law360 (Dec. 8, 2023),

I have discussed the varying approaches in Should Courts Use Standing Orders or Local Rules to Address A.I.?

The Eastern District of Michigan’s Notice of Proposed Amendments is posted on the court’s website. It states: “At their regular meeting on December 4, 2023, the Judges of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan approved for publication and comment amendments to” several Local Rules. Proposed Local Rule 5.1(a)(4) would state:

(4) Disclosing Use of Artificial Intelligence.

(A) “Artificial intelligence” or “AI” means the capability of computer systems or algorithms to imitate intelligent human behavior.

(B) “Generative artificial intelligence” or “Generative AI” means artificial intelligence that is capable of generating new content (such as images or text) in response to a submitted prompt (such as a query) by learning from a large reference database of examples.

(C) If generative AI is used to compose or draft any paper presented for filing, the filer must disclose its use and attest that citations of authority have been verified by a human being by using print volumes or traditional legal databases and that the language in the paper has been checked for accuracy by the filer.
Eastern District of Michigan Proposed Local Rule 5.1(a)(4).

Comments may be sent to Local_Rules@mied.uscourts.gov or to a mailing address.

Author

Michael D. Berman

Mike is the owner of E-Discovery, LLC, and of counsel at Rifkin Weiner Livingston LLC, in Baltimore. He concentrates on commercial litigation and offers mediation services. He was the primary editor of Electronically Stored Information in Maryland Courts (Md. State Bar Ass’n. 2020), and he co-edited M. Berman, C. Barton, and P. Grimm, eds., Managing E-Discovery and ESI: From Pre-Litigation Through Trial (ABA 2011), and J. Baron, R. Losey, and M. Berman, eds., Perspectives on Predictive Coding (ABA 2016). Mike has litigated a number of cases in the trial and appellate courts in Maryland. He is an Adjunct Professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law where he co-teaches a three-credit discovery workshop that focuses on e-discovery. He has lectured at the Maryland Judicial College and he chaired the Bar committee that drafted the proposed ESI Principles for the District of Maryland. He is a past: co-chair of the Federal District Court Committee of the Maryland State and Federal Bar Associations; chair of the Litigation Section Council, Maryland State Bar Association; and, co-chair of the American Bar Association Litigation Section Book Publishing Board. He graduated from the University of Maryland School of Law and is also an Army veteran. He is admitted to the Maryland bar. The opinions expressed in this blog are not necessarily those of Rifkin Weiner Livingston LLC.
View all posts

Author

Leave a ReplyCancel Reply