Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerEvidence checked Jul 23, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 21, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
An v. Archblock, Inc.
Delaware Ch. · Apr 4, 2025
DE / stateEditorial impact: lowpro sefabricated quotesmisrepresented authorityother
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Misrepresented: Case Law | Cited Terramar Retail Centers for the proposition that the Court has broad discretion in discovery, but Terramar addressed a Rule 12(b)(2) motion and did not support the cited discovery principle. Outcome: Warning.
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether quotations and pincites accurately matched the cited source. The tracked outcome is Warning; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects pro se and fabricated quotes involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in Delaware Ch., making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Misrepresented: Case Law | Cited Terramar Retail Centers for the proposition that the Court has broad discretion in discovery, but Terramar addressed a Rule 12(b)(2) motion and did not support the cited discovery principle. Outcome: Warning.
Operational lesson
This matter connects pro se and fabricated quotes involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in Delaware Ch., making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
DelawareSingle-state evidence scope
CourtDelaware Ch.
Jurisdictionstate
Circuit3rd Circuit
DateApr 4, 2025
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeWarning
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
reported
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Procedural posture
Warning
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
3 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Cited Terramar Retail Centers for the proposition that the Court has broad discretion in discovery, but Terramar addressed a Rule 12(b)(2) motion and did not support the cited discovery principle.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Attributed the quote "A party cannot unilaterally decide to stay discovery." to Deutsch v. ZST Digital Networks, Inc.; the quote is not in Deutsch and the case addressed a receiver's contempt/arrest-warrant matter.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Quoted Production Resources Group v. NCT Group as stating "Delaware courts have traditionally construed the scope of permissible discovery liberally," but the quoted language is not found in NCT or other cases searched.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in An v. Archblock, Inc.?
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Cited Terramar Retail Centers for the proposition that the Court has broad discretion in discovery, but Terramar addressed a Rule 12(b)(2) motion and did not support the cited discovery principle. Outcome: Warning.
- Why does An v. Archblock, Inc. matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects pro se and fabricated quotes involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in Delaware Ch., making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about An v. Archblock, Inc.?
- The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
- Which source supports this An v. Archblock, Inc. summary?
- The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.
Related matters
Related by court, jurisdiction, tool, or classified failure pattern. Similarity does not imply the same facts or outcome.