Jump to content

Jane Doe 1 v X.AI Corp

From AI Law Wiki

AI-generated text. This page was generated using artificial intelligence.

Case Information
Case name Jane Doe 1 v. X.AI Corp[1]
Court U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California[1]
Docket 5:26-cv-09016[1]
Filed August 26, 2026[1]
Judge(s) Not identified in the sources reviewed.
Plaintiffs Jane Doe 1, on behalf of herself and a proposed class[1]
Defendants X.AI Corp.; X.AI LLC[1]
Case type Proposed civil class action[1]
Claims / issues Civil remedies for alleged AI-generated child sexual abuse material, including 18 U.S.C. §§ 2255 and 2252A(f)[1]
Status October 9, 2026: listed in proposed Grok MDL 3205 centralization request; JPML hearing set for December 3, with presentation/waiver notices due November 2. Transfer request pending.[2]

Jane Doe 1 v. X.AI Corp., Case No. 5:26-cv-09016, is a proposed class action filed August 26, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against X.AI Corp. and X.AI LLC.[3] The plaintiff alleges that xAI trained Grok on child sexual abuse material depicting her and that Grok generated new CSAM based on those images.[3][4]


Allegations

The complaint alleges that the plaintiff is a survivor depicted in known, hashed legacy CSAM and that xAI used material depicting her as part of the dataset for Grok’s image and video capabilities.[3] It further alleges that Grok generated new CSAM depicting her and that Grok outputs posted publicly on X were eligible for reuse in model training.[3][4]

The complaint describes the action as the first case accusing xAI of training Grok on CSAM, rather than only failing to prevent Grok from generating abusive images.[4] These are allegations and have not been adjudicated.[3]

Claims and requested relief

The plaintiff asserts claims under Masha’s Law, 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(f), based on alleged production, possession, transportation, and distribution of CSAM.[3] The proposed class covers people in the United States whose childhood images or videos Grok allegedly altered to produce CSAM.[3]

The complaint seeks actual, liquidated, and punitive damages, litigation costs and fees, and injunctive relief requiring xAI to stop generating, possessing, or transporting covered material and to destroy material already created.[3]

Procedural status

The complaint was filed on August 26, 2026, and demands a jury trial.[3] No merits ruling is reported in the cited filing.[3]

See also

Proposed multidistrict proceedings

The JPML’s October 9, 2026 hearing-session order lists this action among thirteen cases in proposed MDL 3205, In re X.AI/Grok Artificial Intelligence Minor Sexual Exploitation Litigation. Plaintiffs request coordinated pretrial proceedings in the Western District of Arkansas; eight listed actions are in that district and five are in the Northern District of California. The panel designated the matter for oral argument at its December 3 session in New Orleans. Presentation or waiver notices are due November 2. The centralization request remains pending.[2]

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 Court filing / case record, reviewed September 7, 2026
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 JPML, October 9, 2026 hearing-session order and schedule (13 pages), pp. 1–3 and 8–9; general order mirrored in the Retailer Tariff docket, listing proposed Grok MDL 3205. Complete body reviewed October 10, 2026.
  3. ↑ 3.00 3.01 3.02 3.03 3.04 3.05 3.06 3.07 3.08 3.09 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, class action complaint, Jane Doe 1 v. X.AI Corp., Case No. 5:26-cv-09016, filed August 26, 2026
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Ars Technica, “Elon Musk’s xAI used child porn to train Grok models, lawsuit says,” August 27, 2026
Retrieved from "https://ailawwiki.com/index.php?title=Jane_Doe_1_v_X.AI_Corp&oldid=6235"