Saqib Kafeel v. Apple Inc., et al.
N.D. California · Apr 1, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- N.D. California
- Record ID
- saqib-kafeel-v-apple-inc-et-al-2026-04-01
- Observed outcome
- The motion for preliminary injunction was denied, and the court issued a formal warning regarding the inclusion of non-existent case law in future filings.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court issued a warning to a pro se litigant after identifying that their court filing contained fabricated case law citations, which the court attributed to the use of generative AI tools. The court explicitly stated that future filings containing non-existent cases may be stricken from the docket.
The linked source identifies the filing problem as: Reply cites a non-existent Ninth Circuit case; court notes the citation does not exist..
The source records a concrete authority-verification problem in a federal proceeding and the tribunal’s documented response to it.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Ip
- Trial
- Warning
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- generative artificial intelligence tools
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Order denying motion for preliminary injunction and issuing a warning regarding citation accuracy.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The court refers to the use of generative artificial intelligence tools.
Limited to the linked source and the documented citation or quotation issue and stated disposition; no unrecorded tool, motive, or broader litigation facts are inferred.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Check the cited authority, reporter reference, and pinpoint against the primary source before filing.
- Correct any unsupported citation promptly and preserve the verification record.
- Treat the listed consequence as case-specific rather than as a general rule about AI use.