Judge Araceli Martinez Olguin

Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin has one of the most explicit AI standing orders in the Northern District of California. Her order doesn't dance around the issue—any submission containing AI-generated content must include a certification that lead trial counsel has personally verified the content's accuracy. Failure to comply can result in sanctions.

This matters because the Northern District of California sits in Silicon Valley, where the attorneys, the clients, and the technology are all cutting-edge. Judge Martinez-Olguin's order recognizes that AI tools are going to be used in her courtroom—she's not banning them. She's making sure the attorneys who use them are taking personal responsibility for the output.

What Judge Martinez-Olguin's Standing Order Requires

Judge Martinez-Olguin's standing order, most recently updated in October 2025, contains an explicit AI provision: any submission containing AI-generated content must include a certification that lead trial counsel has personally verified the content's accuracy. This isn't optional. The certification requirement applies to all filings—motions, briefs, responses, replies, and any other court submission. The order specifically addresses generative AI tools and makes clear that the attorney signing the filing bears full responsibility for everything in it, regardless of how it was produced. The order provides for sanctions for failure to comply with the certification requirement.

How This Compares to Other N.D. California Judges

The Northern District of California has five or more judges with individual AI standing orders, making it one of the most active districts on this issue. But there's no district-wide rule, which means requirements vary dramatically from courtroom to courtroom. Judge Martinez-Olguin's order is among the most direct and enforceable. Compare this to judges who simply remind attorneys of their Rule 11 obligations without adding specific AI certification requirements. In Judge Martinez-Olguin's courtroom, you need an affirmative certification—not just a general awareness of your existing duties. This is a substantive addition to the normal filing requirements.

The Silicon Valley Context

Filing in the Northern District of California means filing in the heart of the technology industry. The cases here frequently involve AI companies, tech giants, and startups building AI products. The judges in this district are more technologically sophisticated than most federal judges, and the attorneys are using the latest AI tools aggressively. Judge Martinez-Olguin's order exists because she knows AI is already embedded in the litigation workflow of Silicon Valley law firms. She's not trying to stop it—she's creating accountability structures that ensure the human lawyer remains in control. If you're litigating a patent case involving machine learning algorithms and your brief was partly drafted by a machine learning model, the irony won't be lost on anyone.

Compliance Steps for Judge Martinez-Olguin's Courtroom

Step 1: Read her current standing order in full—it was updated in October 2025 and may change again. Check the N.D. Cal. website for the latest version. Step 2: If any AI tool was used in drafting, include the certification that lead trial counsel has personally verified accuracy. Step 3: Verification means actually checking—run every citation through Westlaw or Lexis. Step 4: The lead trial counsel must be the person verifying, not a junior associate or paralegal. The order specifies lead trial counsel for a reason. Step 5: Keep records of your verification process. If the certification is challenged, you need to show your work.

Sanctions Risk and Enforcement

Judge Martinez-Olguin's order explicitly provides for sanctions for non-compliance. This is notable because some judges' AI orders lack enforcement teeth—they remind attorneys of existing obligations but don't create new sanctionable conduct. Judge Martinez-Olguin took the opposite approach. Failing to include the required certification when AI was used is itself a sanctionable act, separate from any underlying inaccuracy in the filing. This means you can be sanctioned for not disclosing even if everything in the filing is accurate. The disclosure requirement is independent of the accuracy requirement.

The Bottom Line: Judge Martinez-Olguin requires a specific certification from lead trial counsel verifying the accuracy of any AI-generated content. This is a mandatory, sanctions-backed requirement—not a suggestion. Check her latest standing order before every filing.