11th Circuit AO 1-26-04 — Generative AI Disclosure & Verification [RESCINDED chain: 26-15 → 1-26-18]
Summary
11th Circuit AO 1-26-04 — Generative AI Disclosure & Verification [RESCINDED chain: 26-15 → 1-26-18]
Requirement
[RESCISSION CHAIN: AO 1-26-04 (entered 2026-01-15) was RESCINDED and replaced by AO 26-15 (2026-05-19, per the circuit's official May 20 press release; 26-15 PDF unfetchable in both research passes — text UNVERIFIED). AO 26-15 was itself RESCINDED by AO 1-26-18, signed June 11, 2026, EFFECTIVE June 15, 2026 at 12:01 a.m. — the exact AOSC26-12 moment. The active AO registry serves neither 26-04 nor 26-15 (rescinded orders purged). County Civil and Probate division pages still LINKED AO 26-04 as current as of 2026-07-19 (stale-link anomaly, tasked). No AI disclosure/certification mandate remains in force circuit-wide; Rule 2.515(d)(2) controls.] HISTORICAL VERBATIM (AO 26-04, full text recovered and archived in-repo, chatgpt-corpus/ADMINISTRATIVE_ORDERS/source_text/AO_26-04.txt): "2. MANDATORY DISCLOSURE OF AI USE: Any attorney or self-represented litigant who uses any generative artificial intelligence tool in the preparation of a pleading, motion, memorandum, response, proposed order, or other court record, must disclose such use on the face of the filing. 3. REQUIRED CERTIFICATION: The filing shall include a statement substantially in the following form: \"Generative artificial intelligence was used in the preparation of this filing. The undersigned certifies that all factual assertions, legal authority, and citations have been independently reviewed and verified for accuracy and accepts full responsibility for the contents of this filing.\" This certification may be included at the conclusion of the filing or immediately above the signature block. 5. PROHIBITED CONDUCT: … submission of fictitious, fabricated, or hallucinated legal authority, statutes, quotations, or facts; reliance on AI-generated citations without independent verification; misrepresentation of AI-generated content as independently researched authority; or failure to disclose the use of AI as required by this Order. 6. SANCTIONS: Failure to comply … may result in sanctions, including but not limited to striking the filing; denial of the requested relief; monetary sanctions; contempt proceedings; referral to The Florida Bar … DONE AND ORDERED … this 15th day of January 2026. ARIANA FAJARDO ORSHAN, CHIEF JUDGE." Recitals cite Takefman v. Pickleball Club, LLC, 418 So. 3d 826, 827 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025) and SC2024-0032.
Source of truth
- Source health
- —
- Effective date
- —
- Last verified
- July 19, 2026fable-5 11th-circuit arbitrated ingest 2026-07-20
Reviewer note: Chain resolves the pre-relaunch "AO 26-04 [TEXT PENDING]" watch. Full verbatim recovered 2026-07-20 and archived in-repo (commit 496c1ca); operative sections quoted above. 26-15 text remains UNVERIFIED (both passes).
Related rules
AO 2026-03-Gen — Use of AI in Court Filings [VACATED eff. 6/15/2026 by AO 2026-19-Gen]
The 17th Circuit's circuit-wide AI disclosure/certification mandate (Jan 2026, twice amended) was VACATED in its entirety effective June 15, 2026 by Chief Judge Phillips's AO 2026-19-Gen, expressly citing the statewide framework (AOSC26-12; Rule 2.515(d)(2), SC2026-0673). Several division procedure pages still cite the vacated order.
AO 24-20 — Circuit Civil Active Case Management
Every circuit-civil case reviewed within 120 days of commencement and assigned a track (complex, streamlined, or general); case management orders required; firm continuance policy; sanctions for missed deadlines. Rescinds AO 21-09.
AM 23-C — Uniform Average Time Standards for hearings
Circuit-civil hearing-availability standards: motion calendars ~2 weeks from request; 15-30 min special sets within 45-60 days; longer special sets scale.
AO 22-02 — Docket index numbers on notices + proposed orders
Every attorney-generated notice of hearing and every proposed order must list the docket index number / motion identifier of the motion at issue.