C.D. Cal. judges' AI declarations, set 2: Judges Blumenfeld, Hsu, Hwang (criminal), Kato, Scarsi, Slaughter and Williams Court, and Magistrate Judges Oliver, Sagar and Spaeth
Fill-in AI declarations keyed to ten Central District of California judges: the shared separate-declaration wording (seven judges), Williams Court's use-or-non-use declaration, Scarsi's declaration identifying AI parts, and Hsu's caption note and declaration.
MaintainedWe keep this page up to date.Law stated as at
Kind
Court document A document filed or served in a court or tribunal.
Version
1
Where it applies
United States, United States federal courts, California
AI use
Green The tool writes the first draft inside a template you have already tested. You check it. Without that test, first drafting starts at Yellow.
Source
Written for this library
Status
Maintained. Checked on 8 November 2026 against the 11 authorities it cites, for United States, United States federal courts and California.
When to use it
Use in cases before one of these C.D. Cal. judges when generative AI generated any part of a filing (Scarsi: used in connection with a filing). Judge Williams Court requires a declaration with every motion, pleading or paper, even with no AI use. Judges Walter, Wright, Staton and Viramontes are in set 1 in this library.
How to use this precedent
Check that it fits the matter: read “When to use it” and the places it applies to.
Log in to read the full text. It is free.
Adapt it to the matter, filling in each placeholder shown in [square brackets].
Use AI only as far as the Green level allows. “How AI may be used” says what AI may and must not do.
Before it goes out, a lawyer checks it against current law and each point under “The lawyer checks”.
How AI may be used
A tool may lay out the statement the rule or order provides and fill in facts the signer gives it. The signer decides what to say about the AI use and makes the checks the statement describes.
AI may
Insert the tool name, version and uses the signer has recorded
Insert only a version of the statement that the rule or order provides and that matches the signer's account of AI use
Check that the statement sits where the rule or order says it must
AI must not
Must not state that citations, quotations or facts were checked; only the signer can say that after doing it
Must not describe the AI use more narrowly than the file record shows
Must not put prompts, privileged material or confidential client information in the statement
The lawyer checks
The current rule or order has been opened on the court's own site and matches the words used
Every citation and quotation was checked by a person against an official or recognised source
The statement is placed and signed as the rule requires, by the person the rule names
For Williams Court, version (a) is used only where no portion of the filing was drafted by generative AI