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 76/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Thomas Joseph Goddard v. Sares-Regis Group, Inc., et al.
N.D. California · Oct 21, 2025
CA / federalEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsmisrepresented authoritycivil rights
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Allegation of an 'unprecedented mass recusal of all thirty-nine Contra Costa Superior Court judges on July 24, 2025 (Ex. DD)' presented without support; court treated as unsupported/likely AI-generated.
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is the response recorded in the linked source; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with a recorded judicial response in N.D. California, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Allegation of an 'unprecedented mass recusal of all thirty-nine Contra Costa Superior Court judges on July 24, 2025 (Ex. DD)' presented without support; court treated as unsupported/likely AI-generated.
Operational lesson
This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with a recorded judicial response in N.D. California, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
CaliforniaSingle-state evidence scope
CourtN.D. California
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit9th Circuit
DateOct 21, 2025
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeSee source
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
Procedural posture is not separately recorded in the current dataset.
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.
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Allegation of an 'unprecedented mass recusal of all thirty-nine Contra Costa Superior Court judges on July 24, 2025 (Ex. DD)' presented without support; court treated as unsupported/likely AI-generated.
- Misrepresented: Exhibits & Submissions | Misstatement that Plaintiff's former girlfriend was affiliated with Defendants; court found cited exhibit (Exhibit Q) does not support that affiliation.
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Claim of 'ongoing seizure of essential assistive technology devices preventing compliance with court-ordered treatment (Ex. EE)' presented without supporting evidence and characterized as unsupported.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Thomas Joseph Goddard v. Sares-Regis Group, Inc., et al.?
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Allegation of an 'unprecedented mass recusal of all thirty-nine Contra Costa Superior Court judges on July 24, 2025 (Ex. DD)' presented without support; court treated as unsupported/likely AI-generated.
- Why does Thomas Joseph Goddard v. Sares-Regis Group, Inc., et al. matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with a recorded judicial response in N.D. California, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Thomas Joseph Goddard v. Sares-Regis Group, Inc., et al.?
- 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 Thomas Joseph Goddard v. Sares-Regis Group, Inc., et al. 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.