Cases

Browse AI-related cases by subject. Each case name links to its article, with a court label and a short description. Case articles contain procedural histories and sources. The directory includes pending and resolved matters.

Case Directory

Copyright Cases

• Pictoright v. Meta Platforms (Amsterdam District Court) — Collective licensing and remuneration for images on online platforms.

Books and publishing

• In re Google Generative AI Copyright Litigation (N.D. Cal.) — Copyright infringement in generative AI training.
• In re Salesforce LLM Copyright Infringement Litigation (N.D. Cal.) — Direct copyright infringement in large-language-model training.
• Chicken Soup for the Soul, LLC v. Anthropic PBC (N.D. Cal.) — Copyright infringement, contributory infringement and removal of copyright-management information.
• Hendrix et al. v. Apple Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — Copyright infringement in AI training; fair-use defense.
• Shakespeare v. Anthropic PBC (N.D. Cal.) — Authors and other rightsholders allege Anthropic obtained and retained books through shadow libraries and BitTorrent; a September 18 motion to dismiss is pending.
• In re Mosaic LLM Litigation (N.D. Cal.) — Authors allege Mosaic ML and Databricks used copyrighted books to train MPT and DBRX models; cross-motions for summary judgment are pending.
• Chicken Soup for the Soul, LLC v. Meta Platforms Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — October 29, 2026 minute entry permits an amended complaint by November 6, with an initial copy to Meta by November 3.
• Carreyrou / Cambronne, Inc. et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — October 29, 2026 minute entry permits an amended complaint by November 6, with an initial copy to Meta by November 3.
• Cognella, Inc. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — October 29, 2026 minute entry permits an amended complaint by November 6, with an initial copy to Meta by November 3.
• Hachette Book Group, Inc. v. Google LLC (S.D.N.Y.) — Publishers and Scott Turow allege Google used copyrighted books and articles to train Gemini AI models.
• Elsevier Inc. v. Meta Platforms Inc. (N.D. Cal.; transferred from S.D.N.Y.) — California case-management conference held October 29, 2026 before Judge Chhabria; further conference set for December 11 and briefing-schedule proposal directed.
• Kadrey v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — October 29, 2026 minute entry directs class discovery, revokes interim class-counsel status and sets a December 11 case-management conference.
• Cambronne, Inc. v. Anthropic PBC (N.D. Cal.) — Originally filed as Carreyrou; copyright action against Anthropic following severance of claims against other defendants. September 14, 2026 order sets fact discovery through May 13, 2027 and a January 11, 2028 trial-setting conference. Anthropic’s September 24 consolidated dismissal motion notices a December 17 hearing; the parties selected mediation in an October 1 stipulation.
• Bartz v. Anthropic PBC (N.D. Cal.) — Authors’ copyright class action concerning books used to train Claude; settlement received final approval July 20, 2026.
• Kleiner v. Adobe Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — Author sues Adobe for training SlimLM on pirated Books3/RedPajama dataset (February 2026).
• Lyon v. Adobe Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — Author Elizabeth Lyon challenges Adobe’s use of books in AI training; consolidated with Kleiner.

Journalism, reference works, and online content

• Advance Local Media LLC et al. v. Cohere Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — Copyright infringement, trademark infringement and false designation of origin.
• Chicago Tribune Company, LLC v. Perplexity AI, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — Copyright infringement, trademark infringement and dilution.
• Dow Jones & Company, Inc. and NYP Holdings, Inc. v. Perplexity AI, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — Copyright infringement and related publisher-content claims.
• The New York Times Company v. Perplexity AI, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — Copyright and trademark infringement; trademark dilution.
• Reddit, Inc. v. Perplexity AI, Inc. et al. (S.D.N.Y.) — Scraping and DMCA claims; October 28, 2026 order seeks testimony before deciding whether Proskauer may represent Perplexity.
• USA Today Co., Inc. v. OpenAI Foundation (S.D.N.Y.) — October 15, 2026 order asks plaintiffs to show cause by October 30 why their copyright action should not be stayed pending other OpenAI MDL summary-judgment rulings.
• Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence (D. Del.; 3d Cir.) — Copyright and fair-use dispute over Westlaw headnotes used in legal-research training data; ROSS sought panel or en banc rehearing on November 3, 2026 after the Third Circuit’s affirmance.
• In re OpenAI, Inc., Copyright Infringement Litigation (S.D.N.Y.) — October 15, 2026 orders stay the Times Publishing action pending summary-judgment rulings in other MDL cases and ask USA Today plaintiffs to address a possible stay.
• Doe v. GitHub, Inc. (N.D. Cal.; 9th Cir.) — Open-source code attribution litigation; dismissal of the DMCA claim affirmed, with contract claims remaining.
• The Seattle Times Company and Newsday LLC v. OpenAI Inc. et al. (S.D.N.Y.) — The Seattle Times Company and Newsday LLC allege that OpenAI and Microsoft copied their journalism for generative-AI training and outputs without permission; copyright, DMCA, and trademark claims were filed September 4, 2026.
• ANI Media Pvt Ltd. v. OpenAI Inc. (Delhi H.C., India) — ANI appealed refusal of interim relief; September 15, 2026 notice order allowed a reply and listed the appeal for December 8.
• Brave Software, Inc. v. News Corp. (N.D. Cal.) — Brave seeks a declaration that its publisher-content practices are lawful; News Corp counterclaims that Brave scraped and resold copyrighted articles to AI companies.
• CNN v. Perplexity AI Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — CNN alleges Perplexity copied and distributed CNN stories, videos, images, and other works without authorization (May 2026).
• Reddit Inc. v. Anthropic PBC (Cal. Super. Ct.) — September 18, 2026 docket records survival of contract, interference and UCL claims; unjust enrichment and trespass claims require amendment.
• Gracenote Media Services v. OpenAI (S.D.N.Y.) — Nielsen subsidiary sues OpenAI over unauthorized use of copyrighted media metadata database for AI training (March 2026).
• Encyclopaedia Britannica v. OpenAI Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — Reference publishers’ copyright action; stayed April 21, 2026 pending summary-judgment rulings in other active MDL cases.
• Encyclopaedia Britannica v. Perplexity AI Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — October 27, 2026 discovery order limits excluded-material itemization and requires clarification of excluded artwork by November 10.
• wikiHow, Inc. v. OpenAI Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — wikiHow alleges OpenAI copied 11,211 how-to articles for model training, retrieval-augmented generation, and ChatGPT outputs without permission or payment (filed August 21, 2026).

Music and lyrics

• Gerencia 360 Music, Inc. v. Suno, Inc. et al. (N.D. Cal.) — Copyright infringement, contributory infringement, circumvention and copyright-management information.
• S.A. Jamendo v. NVIDIA Corporation (October 2026 action) (N.D. Cal.) — Copyright infringement, contract, unjust enrichment and unfair competition.
• GEMA v. OpenAI (Munich Regional Court I, 42nd Civil Chamber) — Copyright in lyrics; model memorization and chatbot outputs.
• ABG EPE IP LLC v. Anthropic PBC (N.D. Cal.) — October 23, 2026 complaint alleges unlicensed use of 274 compositions associated with Elvis Presley, circumvention and removal of copyright-management information.
• Justice v. Suno, Inc. (D. Mass.) — Independent artists' derivative-work and DMCA claims survived an August 20, 2026 dismissal motion; a Tennessee consumer-protection claim was dismissed.
• Concord Music Group, Inc. v. Anthropic PBC (N.D. Cal.) — October 21, 2026 fair-use hearing held; Reuters reported no ruling from the bench.
• UMG Recordings v. Suno (2026) (D. Mass.) — Second label action over training recordings; Suno’s October 30 motion seeks a stay pending summary judgment in the 2024 case, with the labels opposed and no granted stay verified.
• UMG Recordings, Inc. v. DistroKid, LLC (D. Del.) — October removals confirmed; separate October 14 Suno subpoena proceeding seeks AI-distribution data from DistroKid.
• SOCAN v. Suno Inc. (Fed. Ct., Can.) — Canada’s music-rights organization alleges that Suno infringes performing rights by generating and streaming outputs that replicate songs in SOCAN’s repertoire; the Federal Court of Canada action was filed September 2, 2026.
• Sony Music Publishing et al. v. Anthropic PBC et al. (N.D. Cal.) — Sony Music Publishing, Warner Chappell Music, and affiliated publishers allege Anthropic copied protected lyrics and sheet music through torrenting, scraping, model training, and Claude outputs; copyright and copyright-management-information claims were filed August 28, 2026.
• Kogon v. Google LLC (N.D. Ill.) — Musicians allege Google used copyrighted music without permission to train its Lyria AI models.
• UMG Recordings Inc. v. Suno Inc. (D. Mass.) — Record labels allege Suno copied sound recordings to train its AI music service.
• UMG Recordings Inc. v. Uncharted Labs Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — Record labels sue Udio AI music platform.
• Sony Music Entertainment v. Uncharted Labs Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — Sony and nine affiliated labels allege Udio copied 30,117 recordings for AI training in a second federal copyright suit filed July 20, 2026.
• BMG Rights Management v. Anthropic PBC (N.D. Cal.) — Music publisher sues over 493 song lyrics used in AI training (March 2026).
• Round Hill Music LP v. Anthropic PBC (N.D. Cal.) — Music publisher alleges Anthropic copied protected lyrics for Claude training and output generation; copyright and DMCA claims filed August 17, 2026.
• Round Hill Music LP v. Suno, Inc. et al. (N.D. Cal.) — Music publisher alleges Suno trained on protected works and Bright Data supplied scraping infrastructure; copyright and DMCA claims filed August 17, 2026.
• GEMA v. Suno (LG München I, Ger.) — Munich Regional Court ruled for GEMA on July 31, 2026, finding copyright infringement in six represented works; revenue disclosure and damages proceedings remain, and Suno is considering an appeal.

Images, visual art, and 3D models

• Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al.; Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. et al. v. Midjourney, Inc. (C.D. Cal.) — Direct and secondary copyright infringement.
• Andersen et al. v. Stability AI Ltd. et al. (N.D. Cal.) — Copyright, copyright-management information, publicity and trade-dress claims.
• Getty Images (US) Inc. and others v. Stability AI Ltd. (United Kingdom) (High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, Chancery Division) — Copyright, database rights, trademarks and passing off.
• Robert Kneschke v. LAION e.V. (Hamburg Regional Court; Hamburg Higher Regional Court; Federal Court of Justice) — Copyright; text and data mining; research exception; machine-readable rights reservation.
• Alcon Entertainment, LLC v. Tesla, Inc. (C.D. Cal.) — Alcon alleges an AI-generated robotaxi-presentation image infringed Blade Runner 2049; Warner Bros. Discovery was dismissed by stipulation and claims against Tesla and Musk continue.
• Kipp Flores Architects, LLC v. AMH Creekside Development, LLC (W.D. Tex.; 5th Cir.) — Architectural-copyright decision interpreting removal of copyright-management information under DMCA § 1202(b).
• Getty Images v. Stability AI (N.D. Cal.) — Getty Images alleges Stable Diffusion trained on copyrighted images; motion to dismiss mostly denied April 2026.
• Beaulier v. NVIDIA et al. (N.D. Cal.; W.D. Wash.) — Artist Austin Beaulier brings separate actions alleging removal of copyright-management information from 3D models used in AI training.
• Disney Enterprises v. MiniMax (C.D. Cal.) — Hollywood studios sue Chinese AI company over AI-generated character images; motions to dismiss filed April 2026 (September 2025).

Video and YouTube content

• Ted Entertainment v. OpenAI Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — YouTubers allege DMCA violations for video scraping (April 2026).
• Ted Entertainment v. Apple Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — Ted Entertainment dismissed its own claims without prejudice October 27, 2026; Matt Fisher remains a plaintiff in the DMCA action.
• Ted Entertainment v. Amazon.com, Inc. (W.D. Wash.) — YouTubers allege DMCA violations for video scraping; initial scheduling deadlines terminated May 20, 2026.
• Businessing LLC v. Runway AI Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — Consolidated YouTube creators’ DMCA access-control action; October 30, 2026 order denies Runway’s dismissal motion.
• Chmura v. Snap Inc. (C.D. Cal.) — YouTuber sues Snap Inc for DMCA circumvention in AI video training (February 2026).

Insurance Coverage Cases

• Citizens Insurance Co. of America v. Wynndalco Enterprises, LLC (7th Cir.) — Duty to defend biometric-privacy claims involving Clearview AI’s facial-recognition technology.

AI-Assisted Insurance Benefit Decisions

• Estate of Gene B. Lokken v. UnitedHealth Group (D. Minn.) — Proposed class action challenging alleged use of nH Predict to terminate Medicare Advantage post-acute-care coverage. A September 18, 2026 order sets class-certification motions for February 16, 2027.

Employment Discrimination Cases

• Harper v. Sirius XM Radio, LLC (E.D. Mich.) — September 30, 2026 judgment on the pleadings dismisses alleged AI-hiring discrimination claims without prejudice for insufficient factual allegations.
• Doe Employees v. Meta Platforms Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — August 24 hearing held; reported remarks favor Meta on interim relief, with a written disposition still unverified.
• Mobley v. Workday Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — September 14, 2026 certification motion followed by limited declarant-deposition order; proposed Rule 23 classes remain uncertified by that order.
• EEOC v. iTutorGroup, Inc. et al. (E.D.N.Y.) — ADEA enforcement action over allegedly age-based automated tutor screening, resolved by a 2023 consent decree.

Federal Employment and Whistleblower Cases

• Oguntade v. Merit Systems Protection Board (Fed. Cir.) — September 22, 2026 precedential opinion reverses a jurisdictional dismissal of a VA employee's AI-tool whistleblower appeal and remands to the MSPB.

Antitrust Cases

• Thomas v. McDonald’s USA, LLC (N.D. Ill.) — October 2, 2026 proposed class complaint alleges McDonald’s used AI-assisted pricing recommendations and pooled franchisee data to coordinate menu prices; the company disputes the allegations.
• Chegg, Inc. v. Google LLC (D.D.C.) — September 30, 2026 dismissal of antitrust claims about AI Overviews and search referrals; California unjust-enrichment claim dismissed after the court declined supplemental jurisdiction.
• Penske Media Corporation v. Google LLC (D.D.C.) — Companion September 30 ruling rejects publisher antitrust theories over AI Overviews; dismissal without prejudice under a final, appealable order.
• Bryant v. Microsoft Corporation (N.D. Cal.) — A September 28, 2026 order denies Microsoft's arbitration motion, dismisses subscribers' federal antitrust claim with leave to amend, and allows California claims to proceed.
• Buist v. Anthropic PBC (N.D. Cal.) — Consumers allege unlawful coordination to slow AI-product improvement.
• United States v. RealPage, Inc. (M.D.N.C.) — September 30 order permits states’ antitrust claims over alleged algorithmic rent coordination to proceed; Pinnacle settlement remains proposed.
• X Corp. and X.AI LLC v. Apple Inc. et al. (N.D. Tex.) — Apple settlement and reported September 14 dismissal; September 17 order denies OpenAI access to the agreement after private review.

Corporate Governance Cases

• Rosen v. Pichai (N.D. Ill.) — Alphabet stockholder derivative action concerning alleged AI-training and biometric practices and related corporate oversight.
• Berliner v. Huang et al. (N.D. Ill.) — NVIDIA stockholder derivative action alleging that officers and directors exposed the company to copyright and biometric-privacy liability through AI-training practices.
• Musk v. Altman et al. (N.D. Cal.) — May 20 order adopted the finding that trial claims were time-barred; remaining claims were addressed in a June 10 scheduling order and July 1 mediation order.
• SEIU Pension Plan Master Trust v. Narayen (N.D. Cal.) — Shareholder derivative litigation concerning Adobe’s AI-training practices and alleged fiduciary breaches.

Defamation Cases

• Walters v. OpenAI, L.L.C. (Ga. Super. Ct., Gwinnett Cnty.) — Defamation claim over false ChatGPT output; summary judgment entered for OpenAI on May 19, 2025 based on defamatory meaning, fault and damages.
• Battle v. Microsoft Corporation (D. Md.) — Bing/Bing Chat identity-conflation defamation suit; arbitration compelled in October 2024, and the federal case dismissed and closed June 11, 2026 following reported resolution in arbitration.
• Fontainebleau Florida Hotel, LLC v. Botach (S.D. Fla.) — October 30, 2026 order denies an emergency stay of the AI-discovery deadline and directs compliance before midnight; actual compliance and later disposition of objections remain unverified.
• Ross v. Lambert (E.D. Tenn.) — A coach's defamation claim concerning allegedly AI-generated videos survived a September 16, 2026 motion to dismiss in part; further record development is pending.
• Keene v. Google LLC (N.D. Ill.) — Defamation suit over Google AI Overviews; two challenged summaries survived dismissal on September 14, 2026.
• Starbuck v. Google LLC (Del. Super. Ct.) — Robert Starbuck alleges Google AI generated and published false statements accusing him of crimes and misconduct; Google's motion to dismiss was denied July 24, 2026.

Privacy Cases

• Padilla v. SpaceXAI Corp. and SpaceXAI LLC (N.D. Ill.) — Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act; alleged facial-geometry collection.
• Vredenburgh and Coutu v. OpenAI OpCo, LLC (N.D. Cal.) — Consumer deception, fraud, privacy and unjust-enrichment claims.
• Alvarez et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (N.D. Ill.) — Biometric privacy, publicity rights and California constitutional privacy.
• ACLU et al. v. Clearview AI, Inc. (Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois) — Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act.
• In re Clearview AI, Inc., Consumer Privacy Litigation (N.D. Ill.; Seventh Circuit) — Biometric-privacy claims and adequacy of class-settlement representation.
• Vacker et al. v. Eleven Labs, Inc. (D. Del.) — Unauthorized voice cloning, likeness and DMCA claims.
• Lehrman and Sage v. Lovo, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — Voice misappropriation, consumer protection, contract, copyright and trademark claims.
• Google Cloud Contact Center AI Privacy Litigation (N.D. Cal.) — October 22, 2026 orders dismiss three callers’ claims with leave to amend and send three others to arbitration, staying only their claims.
• Cruz Barriga v. Sam’s West, Inc. (D. Nev.) — October 9, 2026 protective order bars submission of defendant-produced confidential and attorneys’ eyes only material to open AI platforms, including ChatGPT.
• Tsuda v. TikTok Pte. Ltd. (Tokyo Dist. Ct., Japan) — September 30, 2026 judgment says a voice can receive publicity-rights protection under commercial-use conditions, but dismisses removal claims because the challenged videos were already deleted.
• In re Otter.AI Privacy Litigation (N.D. Cal.) — Proposed class action over AI meeting transcription, consent and voiceprints; August 13, 2026 ruling permits multiple privacy claims to proceed.
• Robinson v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — Voiceprint data-use claim dismissed based on consent reflected in the pleaded terms and disclosures.
• Lowery v. Suno, Inc. (D. Mass.) — Musicians allege Suno commercially exploits name-indexed identities and voiceprints through AI-generated music; publicity-rights and biometric-privacy claims were filed August 31, 2026.
• Pandiscia v. Twitch Interactive, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — Proposed class action alleging Twitch and Amazon used creators’ video streams without permission or compensation to train Amazon generative-AI products.
• Chamberlain v. Granola Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — Proposed class action alleging Granola’s AI note-taking app recorded and transcribed conversations without all participants’ consent and used transcription data for AI-model training.
• New Mexico v. Meta (Facebook privacy) (N.M. Dist. Ct.) — October 21, 2026 $25 billion civil penalty in the separate 2021 consumer-protection case; injunction issues reserved and appeal plans reported.

Consumer Protection and Unlicensed Practice Cases

• Iowa v. TikTok Inc. (Iowa Dist. Ct., Polk Cnty.) — October 31, 2026 ruling allows addictive-design and data-security claims to proceed but excludes prospective injunctive relief on the data-security count.
• SEC v. BG Wealth Sharing Ltd and DSJ Exchange PTY Ltd (N.D. Cal.) — October 29, 2026 civil complaint alleges a $130 million scheme marketed through purported AI trading signals and false SEC credentials; remedies requested.
• State of Arizona ex rel. Kristin K. Mayes v. OpenAI Global, LLC et al. (Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County) — Arizona Consumer Fraud Act.
• State of Arkansas ex rel. Tim Griffin v. OpenAI Global, LLC et al. (Circuit Court of Faulkner County, Arkansas) — Arkansas consumer-protection law.
• State of Idaho ex rel. Raúl R. Labrador v. OpenAI Global, LLC et al. (Fourth Judicial District Court, Ada County, Idaho) — Idaho Consumer Protection Act.
• State of Iowa ex rel. Brenna Bird v. OpenAI Global, LLC et al. (Iowa District Court for Polk County) — Iowa Consumer Fraud Act.
• State of Kansas ex rel. Kris W. Kobach v. OpenAI Global, LLC et al. (District Court of Shawnee County, Kansas) — Kansas Consumer Protection Act.
• State of Montana ex rel. Austin Knudsen v. OpenAI Global, LLC et al. (First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County, Montana) — Montana consumer-protection law.
• State of Nebraska ex rel. Michael T. Hilgers v. OpenAI Global, LLC et al. (District Court of Buffalo County, Nebraska) — Nebraska consumer-protection law.
• State of West Virginia ex rel. John B. McCuskey v. OpenAI Global, LLC et al. (Circuit Court of Mason County, West Virginia) — West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act.
• Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. X Corp. et al. (D. Md.; removed from Circuit Court for Baltimore City) — Baltimore Consumer Protection Ordinance; alleged deceptive marketing and sexualized Grok images.
• In the Matter of Delphia (USA) Inc. (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) — Investment Advisers Act; misleading AI marketing.
• In the Matter of Global Predictions, Inc. (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) — Investment Advisers Act; misleading AI marketing.
• Securities and Exchange Commission v. Albert Saniger Mantinan (S.D.N.Y.) — Securities fraud; alleged misrepresentations about Nate’s AI capabilities.
• Federal Trade Commission v. Evolv Technologies Holdings, Inc. (D. Mass.) — FTC Act; claims about AI-enabled weapons-screening performance.
• In the Matter of Rytr LLC (Federal Trade Commission) — FTC Act; AI-generated consumer reviews and testimonials.
• In the Matter of State of Texas and Pieces Technologies, Inc. (191st Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas) — Texas DTPA; accuracy and safety representations about healthcare generative AI.
• State of Texas v. OpenAI Global, LLC (Tex. Dist. Ct., Collin County) — October 23, 2026 suit alleges deceptive ChatGPT marketing and SCOPE Act violations; Texas requests restrictions on minors' access and new model releases, not yet adjudicated by the reviewed petition.
• Rose v. SpaceXAI LLC (N.D. Cal.) — October 22, 2026 order denies arbitration for insufficient notice of terms; alleged deceptive SuperGrok renewals remain unresolved.
• Vest v. DraftKings, Inc. (D. Mass.) — September 30 proposed class complaint alleges AI-assisted targeting of customers with gambling promotions; DraftKings denies the allegations.
• Kahn and Smith v. Anthropic, PBC (N.D. Cal.) — Proposed class action alleging misleading Claude Max subscription usage and savings claims; consolidated complaint filed September 8, 2026.
• Surber v. Oura Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — Proposed consumer class action alleging that Oura marketed AI-generated sleep-stage estimates as accurate measurements.
• State of Florida v. OpenAI Inc. (Fla. Cir. Ct.) — Florida's civil ChatGPT-safety suit; a September 28, 2026 motion seeks temporary model-development, child-access and safety-representation restrictions while the request awaits a ruling.
• Nippon Life v. OpenAI Foundation (N.D. Ill.) — Insurer sues OpenAI for unlicensed practice of law via ChatGPT (March 2026).
• Kistler v. Eightfold AI Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — FCRA class action challenging AI hiring tools as consumer reports (January 2026).
• Landsheft v. Apple Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — Consumer class action over advertising of enhanced Siri features; claims opened September 21, 2026, with a December 21 deadline and final-approval hearing scheduled for February 24, 2027.
• Pennsylvania v. Character Technologies Inc. (Pa. Commw. Ct.) — Medical-licensing petition is distinct from the October 12 Chapter 11 case; Pennsylvania announced bankruptcy privacy participation October 15.
• K.G.M. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (Cal. Super. Ct.) — Social-media product-liability litigation concerning alleged harm from platform design.

Product Liability, Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases

• Fischman v. Epic Systems Corporation (N.D. Tex.) — Electronic-health-record wrongful-death action; October 23, 2026 protective-order ruling restricts protected discovery inputs to AI tools while preserving other litigation uses.
• His Majesty the King in Right of the Province of British Columbia v. Altman (N.D. Cal.) — British Columbia and a school district allege OpenAI failed to warn authorities before the Tumbler Ridge school shooting.
• Parish v. OpenAI, Inc. (Cal. Super. Ct.) — Estate alleges ChatGPT reinforced a user's religious delusions and contributed to her death; wrongful-death and product-liability claims filed June 15, 2026.
• Gavalas v. Google LLC (N.D. Cal.) — Wrongful-death action; August 5 dismissal hearing taken under submission.
• Huballa v. Google LLC (N.D. Cal.) — Removed civil action against Google; the case article identifies the limits of the available record.
• Stacey v. Altman (N.D. Cal.) — Tumbler Ridge wrongful-death and product-liability action; September 29 order sets an October 20 case-management conference and dismissal-motion deadlines.
• Winters v. OpenAI (Cal. Super. Ct.) — Alleged injuries from ChatGPT medical advice; the reviewed complaint bears an August 3, 2026 filing stamp.
• Carrier v. OpenAI (Cal. Super. Ct.) — California wrongful-death/product-liability suit alleging ChatGPT failed to intervene after repeated self-harm discussions.

Child Safety Cases

• SpaceXAI LLC v. Harry Tiffany IV (N.D. Tex.) — Contract enforcement and indemnification over alleged prohibited Grok use.
• Garcia v. Character Technologies, Inc. (M.D. Fla.) — Character.AI wrongful-death action; plaintiffs filed an October 15, 2026 notice dismissing the action with prejudice following settlement.
• In re Character Technologies, Inc. (Bankr. D. Del.) — Character.AI Chapter 11 case; state attorneys general seek child-safety and privacy protections, and bidding-motion consideration is scheduled for October 30.
• United States v. Anderegg (7th Cir.) — August 25, 2026 ruling affirmed dismissal of a federal in-home possession count involving AI-generated virtual material; other criminal counts remain.
• New Mexico v. Meta Platforms Inc. (N.M. Dist. Ct.) — 2023 child-safety and public-nuisance case; distinct from the 2021 Facebook privacy case and its October 2026 $25 billion judgment.
• Doe v. X.AI Corp. (N.D. Cal.) — Plaintiffs allege AI-generated CSAM from real images of them as minors; proposed class action against xAI and Stability AI under Masha's Law, TVPA and state-law theories. An October 9 panel order sets a December 3 hearing on requested Grok-case centralization.
• Jane Doe 1 v. X.AI Corp. (N.D. Cal.) — CSAM survivor alleges xAI trained Grok on abuse material depicting her and generated new CSAM; proposed nationwide class action filed August 26, 2026. An October 9 panel order sets a December 3 hearing on requested Grok-case centralization.
• Jane Doe v. X.AI Corp. (E.D. Ark.) — Family alleges xAI technology helped create or facilitate AI-generated child sexual abuse material from authentic photographs of a minor.

AI Technology Export-Control Prosecutions

• United States v. Lui (C.D. Cal.) — Federal indictment alleges illegal diversion of export-controlled GPU servers to China through third countries; the defendant was arrested October 1.

Criminal Cases and AI Evidence

• Gillespie v. Superior Court (Cal. Ct. App., 4th Dist., Div. 1) — Unpublished November 4, 2026 decision denies a diversion-related writ challenge and upholds admission of ChatGPT-assisted expert testimony based on deference to the trial court’s credibility finding.
• United States v Anderhub (D. Colo.) — October 21, 2026 order denies a First Amendment motion to dismiss an obscenity-possession count involving allegedly AI-generated fictional depictions, declining to follow Anderegg; no guilt determination.
• United States v. Alfozan (N.D. Cal.) — Recording-device prosecution; AP reports denial of release to home confinement at an October 19 detention hearing.
• State v. Amyda (Iowa) — October 9, 2026 unanimous opinion upholds video authentication through circumstantial evidence and rejects an unsupported deepfake objection, affirming the conviction and sentence.
• United States v. Weber (10th Cir.) — October 8, 2026 order affirms a 300-month sentence involving AI-altered abuse images, emphasizing additional victims and breach of trust.
• State v. Tolbert (Ohio Ct. App., Eighth Dist.) — October 1, 2026 opinion reverses suppression of apartment-search evidence after finding independent warrant observations sufficient despite a challenged Clearview AI facial-recognition lead; case remanded.
• State v. Horcasitas (Ariz. Ct. App.) — Court affirms manslaughter conviction but orders resentencing after finding that an AI-generated victim-impact video made sentencing fundamentally unfair.

AI-Assisted Filings and Attorney Sanctions

• PC-59 Doe v. Jewish Board of Family and Children’s Services, Inc. (N.Y. Sup. Ct., N.Y. Cnty.) — October 28, 2026 order imposes a $250 attorney sanction for unverified AI-assisted legal assertions and a false quotation.
• Baqleh v. Altamirano (N.D. Cal.) — October 28, 2026 order denies AI-assisted review of confidential body-camera footage on the specific record and proposed safeguards.
• Lisandrillo v. Palozzi (Fla. 4th DCA) — Petition denied September 16, 2026; October 21 referral of counsel to the Florida Bar after a show-cause response concerning frivolous filings and suspected AI assistance. Referral is distinct from later discipline.
• Chilingarian v Blanche (10th Cir.) — October 20, 2026 unpublished Tenth Circuit order denies immigration review largely for inadequate briefing and flags suspected AI citation errors.
• Matthews v City of Tacoma (Wash. Ct. App., Div. II) — October 20, 2026 unpublished Washington opinion affirms summary judgment on ordinary civil grounds and flags suspected AI citation errors.
• Jackson Federation of Teachers v Fitch (5th Cir.) — October 22, 2026 opinion vacates a preliminary injunction and directs reassignment after AI-related fabrications and legal errors in district-court orders; constitutional claims return for further proceedings.
• HHS and National Treasury Employees Union (FLRA) — October 21, 2026 decision denies telework-award exceptions and warns about defective citations; possible AI use is suspected, not established.
• João Carlos de Novaes and others v. Caixa Econômica Federal (STJ, Brazil) — October 20, 2026 ruling denies an internal appeal and imposes a total R$20,000 personal fine on counsel for hidden AI instructions; the attempt did not affect the appeal’s outcome.
• King v. AT&T Corp. (W.D. Wash.) — October 13, 2026 order requires a self-represented litigant to disclose generative-AI use and certify filings and correspondence after nonexistent citations; remaining claims proceed.
• Flycatcher Corp. Ltd. v. Ozmos Company LLC (S.D.N.Y.) — October 9, 2026 order awards $38,877.59 in fees and costs following the February 5 sanctions decision over false AI citations.
• Weir v. Darden Restaurants (10th Cir.) — October 9, 2026 order affirms dismissal of employment claims and warns a self-represented litigant about future sanctions over apparent AI-generated false citations.
• Miescke v. Pahl (Wis. Ct. App.) — October 8, 2026 unpublished opinion awards fees for a frivolous appeal and separately cautions about possible AI-generated inaccuracies and sensitive-data privacy.
• Kid International, LLC v. City National Bank of Florida (Fla. 4th DCA) — October 7, 2026 opinion affirms summary judgment and awards appellate attorney’s fees jointly against the plaintiffs and counsel over fabricated authorities in AI-assisted briefing; amount to be set on remand.
• Washington v. Justice (Fla. 2d DCA) — October 7, 2026 opinion dismisses an appeal over eleven fictitious citations and restricts related future filings, with counsel and already-pending-proceeding exceptions.
• Shannon v. Shannon (Neb. Sup. Ct.) — October 2, 2026 opinion strikes a self-represented appellant's AI-assisted brief containing fabricated citations, affirms after plain-error review and warns of possible dismissal in future cases.
• Ex parte Bradley Thomas (Tex. App.—Fort Worth) — September 24, 2026 opinion affirms habeas denial for inadequate briefing, noting apparently AI-assisted and inaccurate authorities.
• Simpson v. Porter (Ark. Sup. Ct.) — October 1, 2026 order asks a pro se petitioner to explain an apparently nonexistent citation that the court suspects may have been generated by AI; a response is due October 15.
• Matter of Sethi (B.I.A.) — Precedential reciprocal discipline suspends an immigration attorney after a federal appellate sanction over fabricated citations and false statements concerning AI use.

• Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd v. Kumar (Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, England and Wales) — August 25, 2026 strike-off order addresses AI-generated false authorities in disciplinary submissions; the published judgment says an appeal is pending and the order remains in force.
• Black v. Lybrand (E.D. Tex.) — September 3, 2026 order restricts further amendments and warns about unsupported AI-assisted filings.
• Hancox v. Sutherland and Others (Emp. App. Trib., U.K.) — September 17, 2026 judgment addresses litigants’ responsibility for AI-assisted filings; one appeal ground proceeds to a full hearing.
• Beus Gilbert PLLC v. Brigham Young University (D. Utah) — Rule 11 sanctions against attorneys for unverified AI-assisted briefing.
• State v. Sandoval / In re Stephen D. Aarons (N.M.) — Attorney contempt for unverified AI-assisted briefing; criminal appeal continues.

Judicial Discipline

• Inquiry Concerning Lauren Nichole Peffer (Fla.) — October 9, 2026 order imposes a 30-day suspension, fine and public reprimand over unverified campaign claims and a fabricated recording; suspension timing is to be set by the circuit chief judge.

Privilege and Work Product Cases

• Villanueva v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (D. Nev.) — September 29, 2026 order distinguishes discoverable expert ChatGPT case summaries from protected prompts, deposition preparation and draft-report material.
• United States v. Heppner (S.D.N.Y.) — Criminal case addressing privilege claims for materials generated using a public AI tool.
• Warner v. Gilbarco (E.D. Mich.) — Civil litigation addressing work-product protection for a self-represented litigant’s AI-assisted materials.

Trade Secret Cases

• Apple Inc. v. Liu et al. (N.D. Cal.) — Trade-secret misappropriation and breach of confidentiality agreements.
• CreateAI Holdings, Inc. v. Bot Auto TX Inc. (Tex. App.—15th Dist.) — Autonomous-trucking trade-secret dispute; the September 15, 2026 decision affirmed denial of a temporary injunction on a preliminary record.

Patent and Authorship Cases

• Many Worlds 2T Innovations LLC v. OpenAI OpCo, LLC (E.D. Tex.) — Patent infringement concerning retrieval, personalization and content generation.
• Zentian Ltd. v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir.) — September 25, 2026 nonprecedential opinion affirms a PTAB obviousness decision on a speech-recognition patent using neural networks or hidden Markov models.
• Artificial Intelligence Industry Association, Inc. v. Geisel Software, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.) — September 23, 2026 order dismisses synthetic-image-training patent action without prejudice for lack of standing; the claimed assignment was signed after suit was filed.
• University of Tennessee Research Foundation v. Anthropic PBC (D. Del.) — University research foundation alleges Anthropic infringes two neural-network and neuroscience-inspired computing patents.
• www.ai.law Corp. v. Butler Labs Inc. (N.D. Cal.) — AI.Law alleges Eve Legal infringes an AI-assisted legal-document drafting patent (June 2026).
• Thaler v. Vidal (Fed. Cir.) — Patent inventorship litigation addressing whether an AI system can qualify as an inventor.

Government Procurement

• TRAX International Corp. v. United States (Ct. Fed. Cl.) — September 11, 2026 order, publicly reissued October 5, requires government lawyers to explain inaccurate statements about FAST TRACK AI evaluations; the contract award was upheld September 3.

Government Transparency

• Tax Analysts v. Internal Revenue Service (D.D.C.) — October 14, 2026 ruling protects sensitive AI audit-selection information but requires the IRS to justify withholding the data cards in full.
• One Hundred Miles v. Effingham County Industrial Development Authority (Ga. Super. Ct.) — September 21, 2026 action challenging the open-government process for OpenAI’s Project Camellia.
• War Horse News, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense (D.D.C.) — FOIA action seeking records of senior Pentagon officials’ generative-AI use.

Constitutional and Regulatory Challenges

• City of Imperial v. County of Imperial (Cal. Super. Ct., Imperial Cnty.) — Environmental-review challenge to an AI data center; the September 9, 2026 decision requires whole-project CEQA review and an environmental impact report.
• Elections Division v. Independence Institute (Colo. Sec’y of State, Admin. Hr’g Off.) — Administrative deepfake-disclosure proceeding over an AI-generated political advertisement; the respondent’s October 8, 2026 dismissal motion invokes satire, parody and the First Amendment.
• Accountability in State Government v. Knudsen (D. Mont.) — Challenge to Montana’s AI election-communication law; preliminary relief protects the named plaintiffs.
• X.AI LLC v. Ellison (D. Minn.; 8th Cir.) — First Amendment challenge to Minnesota’s AI nudification law; Eighth Circuit granted an injunction pending appeal October 2, 2026 without deciding the merits.
• The Babylon Bee v. Castillo (D.N.M.) — First Amendment challenge to New Mexico HB 182's disclaimer requirements for AI-generated political satire (August 2026).
• Anthropic PBC v. U.S. Department of War (N.D. Cal.; D.C. Cir.) — Federal defendants appealed the California judgment to the Ninth Circuit October 26; separate D.C. Circuit procurement rehearing remains distinct.
• XAI v. Bonta (C.D. Cal.) — xAI challenges California AB 2013 AI training data transparency law on First Amendment, Takings, and Due Process grounds; preliminary injunction denied March 4, 2026 (December 2025).
• xAI v. Weiser (D. Colo.) — xAI challenges Colorado AI Act on constitutional grounds; DOJ intervenes alongside xAI (filed April 9, 2026).

Computer Access and AI Agents

• OpenEvidence Inc. v. Doximity, Inc. (D. Mass.) — Medical AI platform access and commercial-statement dispute; all claims and counterclaims voluntarily dismissed with prejudice by October 16, 2026 stipulation.
• LASST v. OpenAI (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco) — LASST alleges OpenAI agents unlawfully accessed Hugging Face systems during internal tests and seeks an injunction; the September 29, 2026 complaint has no verified docket number.
• Amazon.com Services, LLC v. Perplexity AI, Inc. (N.D. Cal.; 9th Cir.) — Comet AI Assistant computer-access and contract-interference claims; Perplexity moved October 13, 2026, to dismiss the amended complaint and stay discovery.

Environment and AI infrastructure

• NAACP and NAACP Mississippi State Conference v. X.AI Corp. and MZX Tech LLC (N.D. Miss.) — Clean Air Act citizen suit concerning gas-turbine permitting and emissions.
• Carter and Anderson v. X.AI Corp. and MZX Tech LLC (W.D. Tenn.) — Nuisance, negligence, trespass and local noise-ordinance claims.

Trademark Cases

• TradeSun, Inc. v. OpenAI OpCo, LLC and OpenAI Group PBC (N.D. Cal.) — Trademark infringement, false association and unfair competition concerning ASTRA.