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.
David R. Pete v. United States Department of Justice, et al.
E.D. Texas · Oct 10, 2025
TX / federalEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsadministrativetrial
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a case in his objections that the court could not locate; plaintiff later claimed he had submitted authentic copies but attached none; the court concluded the citation was AI-generated and fake. Outcome: Magistrate Judge's recommendation adopted; in forma pauperis denied; plaintiff ordered to pay $405 filing fee within 10 days or the case will be dismissed..
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Magistrate Judge's recommendation adopted; in forma pauperis denied; plaintiff ordered to pay $405 filing fee within 10 days or the case will be dismissed.; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Unidentified with Magistrate Judge's recommendation adopted; in forma pauperis denied; plaintiff ordered to pay $405 filing fee within 10 days or the case will be dismissed. in E.D. Texas, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a case in his objections that the court could not locate; plaintiff later claimed he had submitted authentic copies but attached none; the court concluded the citation was AI-generated and fake. Outcome: Magistrate Judge's recommendation adopted; in forma pauperis denied; plaintiff ordered to pay $405 filing fee within 10 days or the case will be dismissed..
Operational lesson
This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Unidentified with Magistrate Judge's recommendation adopted; in forma pauperis denied; plaintiff ordered to pay $405 filing fee within 10 days or the case will be dismissed. in E.D. Texas, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
TexasSingle-state evidence scope
CourtE.D. Texas
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit5th Circuit
DateOct 10, 2025
UN
AI toolUnidentified
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeMagistrate Judge's recommendation adopted; in forma pauperis denied; plaintiff ordered to pay $405 filing fee within 10 days or the case will be dismissed.
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
not established
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Procedural posture
Magistrate Judge's recommendation adopted; in forma pauperis denied; plaintiff ordered to pay $405 filing fee within 10 days or the case will be dismissed.
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a case in his objections that the court could not locate; plaintiff later claimed he had submitted authentic copies but attached none; the court concluded the citation was AI-generated and fake.
- Fabricated: Case Law | A second case citation in the plaintiff's objections likewise could not be verified; the court found it to be an AI-hallucinated fake opinion and declined to rely on objections based on it.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in David R. Pete v. United States Department of Justice, et al.?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited a case in his objections that the court could not locate; plaintiff later claimed he had submitted authentic copies but attached none; the court concluded the citation was AI-generated and fake. Outcome: Magistrate Judge's recommendation adopted; in forma pauperis denied; plaintiff ordered to pay $405 filing fee within 10 days or the case will be dismissed..
- Why does David R. Pete v. United States Department of Justice, et al. matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Unidentified with Magistrate Judge's recommendation adopted; in forma pauperis denied; plaintiff ordered to pay $405 filing fee within 10 days or the case will be dismissed. in E.D. Texas, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about David R. Pete v. United States Department of Justice, et al.?
- 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 David R. Pete v. United States Department of Justice, et al. 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.