In Re CorMedix

Ficha del Equipo Editorial a partir de la base mundial AI Hallucination Cases de Damien Charlotin. Verifica siempre en la fuente original.

El 23 de julio de 2025, D.C. New Jersey (Estados Unidos) conoció un asunto en el que un juez se apoyó en la herramienta de IA ChatGPT y el expediente registró contenido alucinado.

Qué se alucinó

• Tergiversación de jurisprudencia. "The Opinion says: “ In Dang v. Amarin Corp. PLC , the court applied the core operations doctrine where executives made misleading statements about Vascepa, the company’s only product, while ignoring FDA Form 483s and audits identifying significant regulatory risks.” Op. at 22. However, the Dangcourt dismissed the plaintiffs’ securities fraud complaint and specifically rejected the plaintiffs’ argument under the “core operations” doctrine. 7"
• Citas falsas de jurisprudencia. "Similarly, the Opinion quotes Dang as referring to “classic evidence of scienter,” id. at 20, but the case does not contain that quote."
• Tergiversación de jurisprudencia. "Second, the Opinion relies on In re Intelligroup Securities Litigation, 527F. Supp. 2d262 (D. N.J. 2007), to support the followin g proposition: “Courts hav e repeatedly held that SOX certifications can support a strong inference of scienter when executives certify internal controls while aware of or recklessly disregarding serious deficien cies, especially when the iss ues pertain to cor e operations.” Op . at 24. [...] However, as in Dang, the court in Intelligroup granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety."
• Citas falsas de jurisprudencia. "Moreover, Intelligroup does not contain the quotation about “false statements in their own right,” as re ferenced in the Opinion. Op. at 24.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. "Third, the Opinion contains the following statement in the scienter section: “Similarly, in Stichting Pensioen fonds Metaalen Techniek v. Verizon Commc’ ns Inc .,No. 23-05218, 20 21WL35409 68, at* 1517 (S.D.N.Y.Au g. 10,2021), [...] We have not been able to identify this case from the Southern District of New York, but we believe the Court was referring to a case with the same caption from the District of New Jersey."
• Citas falsas de jurisprudencia. Fourth, the Opinion attributes two quotes to City of Warwick Retirement System v. Catalent, Inc., No. 23-1108, 2024 WL 3219616 (D.N.J. June 28, 2024), but they are not contained in that case. Op. at 17 (“The absence of insider trading is not dispositive.”); id. (“The importance of the product to the company’s financial success supports the inference of s cienter.”).
• Citas falsas de jurisprudencia. Fifth, the Opinion also attributes a quote to Roofer’s Pension Fund v. Papa, No. 16-2805, 2018 WL 3601229 (D.N.J. July 27, 2018), but the quote is not found in that case. Op. at 27
• Citas falsas de pruebas o escritos. Finally, in addition to the above case citations, the Opinion attributes two quotes to Defendants that they are not alleged to have made.

Desenlace

Opinion withdrawn by judge. Sanción profesional: No.

Ficha del caso

Fuentes: base de datos de Damien Charlotin.

¿Conoces un caso que falte, o uno colombiano que debamos cubrir a fondo? Escríbenos.