Which source supports this Troy Allen Berg v. Mandi Marie Wondra 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.

HomeCasesTroy Allen Berg v. Mandi Marie Wondra

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

Troy Allen Berg v. Mandi Marie Wondra

D. Oregon · Dec 12, 2025

OR / federal Editorial impact: low pro se fake citations fabricated quotes misrepresented authority Warning

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The court issued a warning to the pro se petitioner regarding his duty of candor and compliance with Rule 11 after he submitted filings containing fabricated case law, misrepresented authorities, and non-existent quotations, which the court identified as likely generated by artificial intelligence.

Why the court cared: Outdated Advice: Overturned Case Law | Petitioner relied on a Ninth Circuit decision that was subsequently vacated by the Supreme Court. || False Quotes: Case Law | Petitioner attributed a non-existent passage to Monasky (footnote 3) and quoted language not in the opinion. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Petitioner cited Cuellar v. Joyce for the proposition regarding the mature-child defense though that case does not discuss the defense. || Outdated Advice: Overturned Case Law | Petitioner cited Blondin for a quoted principle it does not contain and which the Court noted has been effectively abrogated by later Supreme Court authority. || Fabricated: Case Law | Petitioner cited a British case that does not exist; Court's exhaustive search found no such authority.
Why it matters now: This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Oregon, with the listed outcome: Warning.

Why this matter is tracked

In a petition for the return of a child under the Hague Convention, the petitioner, appearing pro se, submitted multiple filings containing fabricated case law, misrepresented legal authorities, and non-existent quotations. The court identified that the petitioner cited vacated decisions, attributed non-existent passages to Supreme Court opinions, and cited a non-existent British case. Upon inquiry by the court, the petitioner admitted to an inability to independently verify the citations and acknowledged his obligations under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. The court denied the petition on the merits, finding that the child's habitual residence was the United States and that the child met the mature child exception, while noting the petitioner's reliance on AI-generated hallucinations in his briefing.

Operational lesson

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Oregon, with the listed outcome: Warning.

Record details

OregonSingle-state evidence scope

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

CourtD. Oregon

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit9th Circuit

DateDec 12, 2025

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeThe court denied the Petition for Return and issued a warning regarding the petitioner's professional obligations under Rule 11.

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

implied

The court asked the petitioner if he used AI to prepare his motion.

Procedural posture

Findings of fact and conclusions of law following a trial on a Verified Petition for Return of Child to Habitual Residence.

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Outdated Advice: Overturned Case Law | Petitioner relied on a Ninth Circuit decision that was subsequently vacated by the Supreme Court.
False Quotes: Case Law | Petitioner attributed a non-existent passage to Monasky (footnote 3) and quoted language not in the opinion.
Misrepresented: Case Law | Petitioner cited Cuellar v. Joyce for the proposition regarding the mature-child defense though that case does not discuss the defense.
Outdated Advice: Overturned Case Law | Petitioner cited Blondin for a quoted principle it does not contain and which the Court noted has been effectively abrogated by later Supreme Court authority.
Fabricated: Case Law | Petitioner cited a British case that does not exist; Court's exhaustive search found no such authority.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Troy Allen Berg v. Mandi Marie Wondra?: The court issued a warning to the pro se petitioner regarding his duty of candor and compliance with Rule 11 after he submitted filings containing fabricated case law, misrepresented authorities, and non-existent quotations, which the court identified as likely generated by artificial intelligence.
Why does Troy Allen Berg v. Mandi Marie Wondra matter for legal AI risk?: This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in D. Oregon, with the listed outcome: Warning.
What does the public record establish about Troy Allen Berg v. Mandi Marie Wondra?: 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 Troy Allen Berg v. Mandi Marie Wondra 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.

Owen v. Askew et al.D. Oregon · Jul 28, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Michael J. Cross v. PHH Mortgage Corporation, et al.D. Oregon · Jun 29, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations David Martin v. ODS Community Dental Insurance et al.D. Oregon · Feb 18, 2026same court · pro se + fabricated quotes Couvrette v. WisnovskyD. Oregon · Mar 23, 2026same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Steven Nemec v. Kelsey Kanoelani Alao and Alyssa Jade AlaoD. Oregon · Apr 10, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Yves Hector Vimegnon v. Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc.D. Oregon · Mar 30, 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. Oregon 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