Which source supports this Thu Thuy Nguyen v. PennyMac Loan Services 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.

HomeCasesThu Thuy Nguyen v. PennyMac Loan Services

Evidence review: primary document verified. The linked primary document was extracted and checked with page-level evidence locators.

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 81/100. It passes the current publication gate; that is not a legal-editorial review or a guarantee that every field has been independently verified.

Corpus matter record

Thu Thuy Nguyen v. PennyMac Loan Services

D. Nevada · Jan 7, 2026

NV / federal Editorial impact: medium pro se fake citations contract trial Warning Monetary

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The Court issued a formal warning to the pro se plaintiff regarding the citation of fabricated legal authorities. The Court also explicitly stated it would entertain a motion for attorney's fees from the defendants to recover costs associated with addressing the plaintiff's inclusion of these fake citations in her filings.

Why the court cared: Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Obot v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.; the Court could not locate the D. Nev. decision and concluded it was fake. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited McCart-Pollak v. On Demand Capital Grp., LLC; the Court was unable to locate this D. Nev. decision and found it to be fake. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited U.S. Bank N.A. v. Farhi; the Court could not locate the authority as cited and determined it to be fake. || Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Bernard v. First Horizon Home Loan Corp.; the Court was unable to locate the D. Nev. decision and found the citation to be fake.
Why it matters now: This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Nevada, with the listed outcome: Warning; Possible Monetary Sanction.

Why this matter is tracked

In a mortgage-related civil action, the District Court for the District of Nevada granted motions to dismiss filed by defendants PennyMac Loan Services, LLC, MERS, and Fannie Mae. During the proceedings, the pro se plaintiff submitted a response containing four citations to legal authorities that the Court could not locate and subsequently determined to be fabricated. The Court issued a formal warning to the plaintiff, noting that the submission of fake authorities is a sanctionable offense under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. Furthermore, the Court indicated it would entertain a motion for attorney's fees regarding costs incurred by the defendants in researching and responding to the plaintiff's filings containing the non-existent case law.

Operational lesson

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Nevada, with the listed outcome: Warning; Possible Monetary Sanction.

Record details

NevadaSingle-state evidence scope

Explore NVOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.

CourtD. Nevada

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit9th Circuit

DateJan 7, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeThe Court issued a warning to the plaintiff regarding the use of fake citations and stated it would entertain a motion for attorney's fees for costs incurred by defendants in responding to the filings.

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

The Court granted the defendants' motions to dismiss the plaintiff's claims, with some claims dismissed with prejudice and others without prejudice, while issuing a warning regarding the plaintiff's use of fabricated case law.

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

4 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Obot v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.; the Court could not locate the D. Nev. decision and concluded it was fake.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited McCart-Pollak v. On Demand Capital Grp., LLC; the Court was unable to locate this D. Nev. decision and found it to be fake.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited U.S. Bank N.A. v. Farhi; the Court could not locate the authority as cited and determined it to be fake.
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff cited Bernard v. First Horizon Home Loan Corp.; the Court was unable to locate the D. Nev. decision and found the citation to be fake.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Thu Thuy Nguyen v. PennyMac Loan Services?: The Court issued a formal warning to the pro se plaintiff regarding the citation of fabricated legal authorities. The Court also explicitly stated it would entertain a motion for attorney's fees from the defendants to recover costs associated with addressing the plaintiff's inclusion of these fake citations in her filings.
Why does Thu Thuy Nguyen v. PennyMac Loan Services matter for legal AI risk?: This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Nevada, with the listed outcome: Warning; Possible Monetary Sanction.
What does the public record establish about Thu Thuy Nguyen v. PennyMac Loan Services?: 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.
Which source supports this Thu Thuy Nguyen v. PennyMac Loan Services 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.

Wendy Wolkenstein and Rebecca Knepp v. Dan Heinrich and Samual TilleryD. Nevada · Apr 6, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Anthony Wallace v. PennyMac Loan Services, LLC, et al.D. Nevada · Mar 26, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Nicole Beverly Silverberg v. Steven Bonomo, et al.D. Nevada · Dec 30, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations Coleman & Lewis v. PNC Bank, N.A.D. Nevada · Nov 5, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations Melinda L'Shay Johnson v. MINI of Las VegasD. Nevada · Sep 24, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations Joseph M. Speranza v. Golden Technologies, Inc.D. Nevada · Aug 21, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive
The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open recorded source Suggest a correction to this record

Public-record statuspublic record, not an allegation-only entry

Indexing eligibilitypublicly indexable with evidence status disclosed

Evidence-review statusprimary document verified

Published and maintained byManu Ayala · AI VortexIndependent legal AI risk intelligence

Evidence review recorded Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Sep 10, 2026; latest tracked decision Sep 8, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Open D. Nevada profile Explore jurisdiction

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology