This is the first of what may be a number of orders entered in coming weeks and months as courts try to stop the filing of AI-drafted briefing in response to the recent fiasco in New York. Judge Brantley Starr of the NDTX leads us off with a certification requirement that attorneys are not to use generative artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Harvey.AI, or Google Bard) without a human being checking the language.
It’s so rare to see something truly new, but this motion in proffer’s clothing counts. Plaintiff filed a “Proffer” requesting, um, that the court admit stuff and take judicial notice of other stuff. But not a motion at all, so, uh, no need for a certificate of conference. Not so fast, Judge Gilstrap held, and denied the motion, sorry “Proffer”.
Judge Pitman denied the Twiqbal motion, fiunding that the plaintiff plausibly alleged a case of infringement.
This is a trademark dispute in which Judge Ellison decided that the defendants motion to transfer should be granted to the first-filed court, here the WDTX. If you’re looking for an explication of the “first-to-file” rule, look no further.
This is a gray- goods trademark infringement case. The court recommended denying the defendants motion for summary judgment, and granted the plaintiffs in part.
Judge Mazzant granted the prevailing plaintiff’s application for profits, attorneys fees and costs, arising out of the defendant’s violation of the injunction against improper listings of cer-tain guitars. The court’s ruling has some helpful analysis on attorney’s fees.