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 81/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Lohbeck v. CSL Plasma Inc.
E.D. California · Jul 16, 2026
CA / federalEditorial impact: lowpro sefabricated quotesmisrepresented authoritycivil rights
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Misrepresented: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff asserted the complaint was filed/served on December 15, 2025, contrary to the state-court record showing service on March 10, 2026. 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 E.D. California, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Misrepresented: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff asserted the complaint was filed/served on December 15, 2025, contrary to the state-court record showing service on March 10, 2026. Outcome: Warning.
Operational lesson
This matter connects pro se and fabricated quotes involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in E.D. California, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
CaliforniaSingle-state evidence scope
CourtE.D. California
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit9th Circuit
DateJul 16, 2026
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: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff asserted the complaint was filed/served on December 15, 2025, contrary to the state-court record showing service on March 10, 2026.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Plaintiff misquoted Gaskell v. Weir, attributing a phrase that does not appear in the opinion.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Hertz Corp. v. Friend for the proposition that declarations are insufficient evidence, a point the Court found lacks basis in that opinion.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Lohbeck v. CSL Plasma Inc.?
- Misrepresented: Exhibits & Submissions | Plaintiff asserted the complaint was filed/served on December 15, 2025, contrary to the state-court record showing service on March 10, 2026. Outcome: Warning.
- Why does Lohbeck v. CSL Plasma Inc. matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects pro se and fabricated quotes involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in E.D. California, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Lohbeck v. CSL Plasma 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 Lohbeck v. CSL Plasma 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.