AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Oct 2, 2026 · Latest decision Oct 1, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesVerduzco v. Con Agra Foods Packaged Foods, LLC
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Corpus matter record

Verduzco v. Con Agra Foods Packaged Foods, LLC

E.D. California · Sep 28, 2026

CA / federalEditorial impact: mediumpro sefake citationsfabricated quotesemploymentStruck Filing
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a quotation about a vacated hearing making the reply deadline moot to Hoffman v. Constr. Protective Servs., Inc., but the court found that the cited case number, Westlaw citation, and quoted language did not correspond to the claimed decision; the court deemed the material possibly fabricated or an AI hallucination. Outcome: Reply Struck.

Why the court cared
The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records Reply Struck. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
Why it matters now
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Reply Struck in E.D. California. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a quotation about a vacated hearing making the reply deadline moot to Hoffman v. Constr. Protective Servs., Inc., but the court found that the cited case number, Westlaw citation, and quoted language did not correspond to the claimed decision; the court deemed the material possibly fabricated or an AI hallucination. Outcome: Reply Struck.

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Reply Struck in E.D. California. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

CaliforniaSingle-state evidence scope
Explore CAOpen its source-linked jurisdiction page and related matters.
CourtE.D. California
Jurisdictionfederal
Circuit9th Circuit
DateSep 28, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeReply Struck
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

Reply Struck

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a quotation about a vacated hearing making the reply deadline moot to Hoffman v. Constr. Protective Servs., Inc., but the court found that the cited case number, Westlaw citation, and quoted language did not correspond to the claimed decision; the court deemed the material possibly fabricated or an AI hallucination.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Verduzco v. Con Agra Foods Packaged Foods, LLC?
Fabricated: Case Law | Plaintiff attributed a quotation about a vacated hearing making the reply deadline moot to Hoffman v. Constr. Protective Servs., Inc., but the court found that the cited case number, Westlaw citation, and quoted language did not correspond to the claimed decision; the court deemed the material possibly fabricated or an AI hallucination. Outcome: Reply Struck.
Why does Verduzco v. Con Agra Foods Packaged Foods, LLC matter for legal AI risk?
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Reply Struck in E.D. California. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Verduzco v. Con Agra Foods Packaged Foods, LLC?
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 Verduzco v. Con Agra Foods Packaged Foods, LLC 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.

Stephen Lohbeck v. Amazon.com Services, LLCE.D. California · Aug 20, 2026same court · pro se + fabricated quotesWilliams v. Dimaanno et al.E.D. California · Sep 28, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsKimberly A. Graves v. Pacific Gas and Electric CompanyE.D. California · Jul 24, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsLohbeck v. CSL Plasma Inc.E.D. California · Jul 16, 2026same court · pro se + fabricated quotesPyle v. Glenn County Sheriff's DepartmentE.D. California · May 12, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsKrista C. Geddes v. LoanCare, LLC, et al.E.D. California · Apr 22, 2026same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes