The following Stipulated Protective Order was entered in Rapacon v. Abbott Laboratories, 2026 WL 2722543 (N.D. Cal. Sep. 15, 2026):
-
USE OF GENERATIVE AI TOOLS
“CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items shall not be submitted to any Open Generative AI tool (e.g., Chat GPT) or any substantially similar tool that is available to the public. Providing “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items to an Open Generative AI tool is considered disclosure to a third party. For purposes of this Protective Order, “Open Generative AI tool” means an artificial intelligence system that may be accessed by the public, or that allows for the underlying code and materials to be accessed by the public.
The Parties may only submit “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items to a Permitted Generative AI Tool. For purposes of this Protective Order, a “Permitted Generative AI Tool” includes the use of enterprise AI tools that: (i) restrict access to authorized users; (ii) do not use customer data to train, refine, fine-tune, or improve publicly available models; (iii) provide reasonable retention and deletion controls; and (iv) maintain commercially reasonable security and confidentiality protections. For the avoidance of doubt, enterprise legal and productivity platforms that satisfy the foregoing requirements, including Thomson Reuters CoCounsel, Microsoft 365 Copilot, and similar enterprise tools, are permitted.
For more information on A.I. Protective Orders, please visit:
- A.I. Protective Order by Consent in Google Case (Sep. 13, 2026);
- No Violation of A.I. Protective Order (Sep. 11, 2026);
- Another Dispute over A.I. Protective Order (Sep. 6, 2026);
- A.I. Protective Orders Are Becoming Routine(Aug. 27 ,2026);
- Another A.I. Protective Order – Part 10 (Aug. 21, 2026);
- Restrictions on Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools to Process Disclosure Materials(Jul. 27, 2026);
- Another A.I. Protective Order(Jul. 9, 2026);
- A.I. Protective Order—Again (Jun. 18, 2026);
- Unicorn Rejects A.I. Protective/Confidentiality Order – Order Entered in Criminal Case(Jun. 4, 2026);
- Are Protective Orders Limiting Upload to AI of Documents Produced by an Opponent in Discovery Becoming the Standard of Care?(May 26, 2026), discussing Rudasill v. Swiss Re American Holding Corporation, 2026 WL 1329451 (S.D.N.Y. May 13, 2026);
- Another Confidentiality Order Limiting Use of AI to Analyze Protected Materials(Apr. 27, 2026), discussing In re: ByHeart, Inc., Infant Formula Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation,2026 WL 1103170 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 23, 2026);
- A.I. Protective Orders Are Becoming Routine(Apr. 20, 2026), discussing Stansfield v. International Business Machines Corporation, 2026 WL 1031230, at *2 (D. Nev. Apr. 16, 2026);
- “Deepfake Executives, Created Via Depositions, Pose Grave Threat”: Protective Order Suggested(Apr. 5, 2026);
- Morgan v. V2X, Inc.,2026 WL 864223 (D. Col. Mar. 30, 2026), as also discussed in Important A.I. Work Product and Protective Order Decision(Mar. 31, 2026);
- Order Prohibiting Upload of Confidential Discovery Documents to Artificial Intelligence (“AI”)(Nov. 3, 2025), based on Warner v. Gilbarco, Inc., 2025 WL 3047881 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 30, 2025);
- Protective Order Limited Uploading Discovery Responses to Open A.I.(Mar. 26, 2026), discussing Jeffries v. Harcros Chemicals, Inc.,2026 WL 820218 (D. Kans. Mar. 25, 2026);
- S.A. v. Jones, 2026 WL 2607719, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 3, 2026);
- Doe v. Google LLC, 2026 WL 2584519 (N.D. Cal. Sep. 1, 2026);
- S.A. v. The New York and Presbyterian Hosp., 2026 WL 2547094, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 28, 2026).