That Xiong v. Minga Wofford (1)
E.D. California · Jan 22, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Court
- E.D. California
- Record ID
- that-xiong-v-minga-wofford-1-2026-01-22
- Observed outcome
- Order to inform client and staff of errors
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
Fabricated: Case Law | Petitioner's reply cited 'Phan v. Barr, No. 1:19-cv-01451, 2019 WL 7758773 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2019)', which the Court identified as an incorrect/nonexistent citation; petitioner later admitted error and submitted a different, real 'Phan' citation. Outcome: Order to inform client and staff of errors.
Fabricated: Case Law | Petitioner's reply cited 'Phan v. Barr, No. 1:19-cv-01451, 2019 WL 7758773 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2019)', which the Court identified as an incorrect/nonexistent citation; petitioner later admitted error and submitted a different, real 'Phan' citation. || Fabricated: Case Law | Petitioner's reply cited 'Flores v. Barr, No. 1:20-cv-00491, 2020 WL 1939565 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 22, 2020)', which the Court identified as an incorrect/nonexistent citation; petitioner later admitted error and provided a different, real citation.
This record documents a Lawyer filing issue in E.D. California, with the listed outcome: Order to inform client and staff of errors.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fake Citations
- Immigration
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Reported
- Recorded tool
- ChatGPT
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Order to inform client and staff of errors
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
ChatGPT is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
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).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Assign a responsible reviewer for AI-assisted research and drafting.