Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-1NEFXY3Generated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Gharavi v. Google LLC

N.D. California · Jan 12, 2026

Jurisdiction
federal
Court
N.D. California
Record ID
gharavi-v-google-llc-2026-01-12
Observed outcome
Motion for sanctions denied.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The court denied the motion for sanctions, ruling that counsel's reliance on Bloomberg Law for a fabricated case citation was inadvertent and did not constitute bad faith or recklessness. The court determined the error was a harmless mistake that did not warrant sanctions.

Why the decision-maker cared

Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel included a non-existent Wisconsin case in a sworn declaration; court found counsel relied on Bloomberg Law and the error was inadvertent and not in bad faith.

Why it matters now

Reliance on Bloomberg Law defeats bad-faith findings, but only if the error is isolated and acknowledged.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fake Citations
  • Contract
  • Trial
  • None Adjudicated
AI attribution
Admitted
Recorded tool
Bloomberg Law
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
The court addressed multiple discovery-related motions, including a motion to compel, a motion to strike, and a motion for sanctions, ultimately denying the motion for sanctions and the motion to strike, while granting the motion to strike filed by the respondent.
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open underlying source

A recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

What this record does—and does not—establish

Counsel declared reliance on Bloomberg Law for the incorrect citation.

Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.

Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Do not treat a paid legal-research product as a substitute for source verification.
  2. Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.