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 90/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Chenco v. Do-Fluoride
D. Idaho · Aug 22, 2025
ID / federalEditorial impact: lowfabricated quotesmisrepresented authoritycontracttrial
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
False Quotes: Case Law | Quoted Infuturia as stating removal is proper when the arbitration clause or award is raised in defense rather than the complaint; court found the quoted sentence does not appear in Infuturia. Outcome: Court denied defendant's motion for leave to file a surreply, admonished counsel for submitting non-existent quotations, and granted plaintiff's motion to remand.. "Counsel should take seriously its obligation to provide the Court with an accurate description of the law. See, e.g., United States v. Hayes, 763 F. Supp. 3d 1054 (E.D. Cal.…
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether quotations and pincites accurately matched the cited source. The tracked outcome is Court denied defendant's motion for leave to file a surreply, admonished counsel for submitting non-existent quotations, and granted plaintiff's motion to remand.; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- Accusing opposing counsel of misstating the law while submitting fake quotes compounds the ethics exposure; verify before accusing.
Why this matter is tracked
False Quotes: Case Law | Quoted Infuturia as stating removal is proper when the arbitration clause or award is raised in defense rather than the complaint; court found the quoted sentence does not appear in Infuturia. Outcome: Court denied defendant's motion for leave to file a surreply, admonished counsel for submitting non-existent quotations, and granted plaintiff's motion to remand.. "Counsel should take seriously its obligation to provide the Court with an accurate description of the law. See, e.g., United States v. Hayes, 763 F. Supp. 3d 1054 (E.D. Cal. 2025) (levying $1,500 in monetary sanctions against counsel personally for fictitious cases and quotations that the court suspected were produced using artificial intelligence),reconsideration denied, No. 2:24-CR-0280-DJC, 2025 WL 1067323 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 9, 2025); Grant v. City of Long Beach, 96 F.4th 1255 (9th Cir. 2024) (striking an appellant's brief and dismissing an appeal for materially misrepresenting or fabricating case citations). After New Materials freely accused opposing counsel of misstating the law, New Materials’ submission of non-existent quotes is troubling (Dkt. 30 at 5 (“Chenco's argument for remand collapses under the weight of its own misreading of the law”); id.at 7 (“Chenco fundamentally misrepresents the applicable removal standard”); Dkt. 34 at 1 (“The proposed sur-reply ... is necessary to address new legal misstatements ....”); id. at 2-3 (“Chenco's failure to address this standard ... misstates controlling law and warrants correction.”)). Accordingly, the Court reminds counsel of their duties to act according to the Idaho Rules of Professional Conduct."
Operational lesson
Accusing opposing counsel of misstating the law while submitting fake quotes compounds the ethics exposure; verify before accusing.
Record details
IdahoSingle-state evidence scope
CourtD. Idaho
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit9th Circuit
DateAug 22, 2025
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeCourt denied defendant's motion for leave to file a surreply, admonished counsel for submitting non-existent quotations, and granted plaintiff's motion to remand.
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
Court denied defendant's motion for leave to file a surreply, admonished counsel for submitting non-existent quotations, and granted plaintiff's motion to remand.
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
6 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Quoted Infuturia as stating removal is proper when the arbitration clause or award is raised in defense rather than the complaint; court found the quoted sentence does not appear in Infuturia.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Quoted Jones Day v. Orrick as stating ‘‘a case need only relate to an arbitration agreement in the broadest sense’’; court found the phrase does not appear in the opinion.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Quoted Jones Day as stating that if a Convention award ‘‘does not appear on the face of the complaint,’’ a ‘‘colorable defense relating to the award’’ is enough for federal jurisdiction; court found the phrase absent from the opinion.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Quoted C.B.F. Industria de Gusa S/A v. AMCI Holdings as stating that recognition of an arbitral award and recognition of a foreign judgment enforcing that award are not mutually exclusive; court found the quoted phrase absent.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Quoted National Aluminum Co. v. Peak Chemical as stating state judgment recognition statutes ‘‘do not override the provisions of the New York Convention or the FAA when those federal laws govern the underlying dispute’’; court found the phrase absent.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Cited Int'l Trading & Indus. Inv. Co. v. DynCorp Aerospace Tech. for the proposition that courts recognize the three-year limitations period under 9 U.S.C. § 207, though that case does not address the statute of limitations.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Chenco v. Do-Fluoride?
- False Quotes: Case Law | Quoted Infuturia as stating removal is proper when the arbitration clause or award is raised in defense rather than the complaint; court found the quoted sentence does not appear in Infuturia. Outcome: Court denied defendant's motion for leave to file a surreply, admonished counsel for submitting non-existent quotations, and granted plaintiff's motion to remand.. "Counsel should take seriously its obligation to provide the Court with an accurate description of the law. See, e.g., United States v. Hayes, 763 F. Supp. 3d 1054 (E.D. Cal.…
- Why does Chenco v. Do-Fluoride matter for legal AI risk?
- Accusing opposing counsel of misstating the law while submitting fake quotes compounds the ethics exposure; verify before accusing.
- What does the public record establish about Chenco v. Do-Fluoride?
- 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 Chenco v. Do-Fluoride 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.