Matter of SGL-HCI Joint Venture
Record source: imported from Damien Charlotin’s AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0); document hosted in his archive: open the upstream document. What AI Vortex adds.
GAO · Apr 28, 2025
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Legal Norm | The protest cited nonexistent lettered subsections of 31 U.S.C. § 3551. GAO stated that § 3551 uses numbered paragraphs, §§ 3551(1)-(3), and contains no § 3551(a) or § 3551(e). Outcome: GAO dismissed the protest under 4 C.F.R. § 21.11(b) because a related protest was pending before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.. The protester's filing cited nonexistent provisions, 31 U.S.C. § 3551(a) and § 3551(e), and attributed quotations concerning nonexclusivity of remedies and judicial review to those provisions. GAO explained that § 3551 contains numbered paragraphs, not lettered subsections, and that the quoted nonexclusivity language appears instead in 31 U.S.C. § 3556. GAO also rejected the protester's characterization of CICA as requiring concurrent GAO and Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction, holding that the protest was properly dismissed because the related court litigation could render GAO review academic and avoiding inconsistent outcomes warranted dismissal.
- Why the court cared
- The structured public record identifies fake citations and fabricated quotes and records GAO dismissed the protest under 4 C.F.R. § 21.11(b) because a related protest was pending before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects fake citations and fabricated quotes with GAO dismissed the protest under 4 C.F.R. § 21.11(b) because a related protest was pending before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. in GAO. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Legal Norm | The protest cited nonexistent lettered subsections of 31 U.S.C. § 3551. GAO stated that § 3551 uses numbered paragraphs, §§ 3551(1)-(3), and contains no § 3551(a) or § 3551(e). Outcome: GAO dismissed the protest under 4 C.F.R. § 21.11(b) because a related protest was pending before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.. The protester's filing cited nonexistent provisions, 31 U.S.C. § 3551(a) and § 3551(e), and attributed quotations concerning nonexclusivity of remedies and judicial review to those provisions. GAO explained that § 3551 contains numbered paragraphs, not lettered subsections, and that the quoted nonexclusivity language appears instead in 31 U.S.C. § 3556. GAO also rejected the protester's characterization of CICA as requiring concurrent GAO and Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction, holding that the protest was properly dismissed because the related court litigation could render GAO review academic and avoiding inconsistent outcomes warranted dismissal.
This matter connects fake citations and fabricated quotes with GAO dismissed the protest under 4 C.F.R. § 21.11(b) because a related protest was pending before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. in GAO. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
GAO dismissed the protest under 4 C.F.R. § 21.11(b) because a related protest was pending before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
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: Legal Norm | The protest cited nonexistent lettered subsections of 31 U.S.C. § 3551. GAO stated that § 3551 uses numbered paragraphs, §§ 3551(1)-(3), and contains no § 3551(a) or § 3551(e).
- Misrepresented: Legal Norm | The protest attributed the quoted nonexclusivity-of-remedies language to 31 U.S.C. § 3551(a). GAO determined that the language actually appears in 31 U.S.C. § 3556 and does not establish mandatory concurrent jurisdiction.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Matter of SGL-HCI Joint Venture?
- Fabricated: Legal Norm | The protest cited nonexistent lettered subsections of 31 U.S.C. § 3551. GAO stated that § 3551 uses numbered paragraphs, §§ 3551(1)-(3), and contains no § 3551(a) or § 3551(e). Outcome: GAO dismissed the protest under 4 C.F.R. § 21.11(b) because a related protest was pending before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.. The protester's filing cited nonexistent provisions, 31 U.S.C. § 3551(a) and § 3551(e), and attributed quotations concerning nonexclusivity of remedies and judicial review to those provisions. GAO explained that § 3551 contains numbered paragraphs, not lettered subsections, and that the quoted nonexclusivity language appears instead in 31 U.S.C. § 3556. GAO also rejected the protester's characterization of CICA as requiring concurrent GAO and Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction, holding that the protest was properly dismissed because the related court litigation could render GAO review academic and avoiding inconsistent outcomes warranted dismissal.
- Why does Matter of SGL-HCI Joint Venture matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects fake citations and fabricated quotes with GAO dismissed the protest under 4 C.F.R. § 21.11(b) because a related protest was pending before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. in GAO. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Matter of SGL-HCI Joint Venture?
- 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 Matter of SGL-HCI Joint Venture 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.
Weekly alert: new AI-hallucination court cases
One short email a week with the newly recorded cases, courts and sanctions. Free, no spam, unsubscribe anytime.