In re: Snowflake, Inc., Data Security Breach Litigation

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

El 5 de febrero de 2026, J.P.M.L. (Estados Unidos) conoció un asunto en el que una parte sin abogado (litigante pro se) se apoyó en una herramienta de IA generativa (no identificada en la decisión) y el expediente registró contenido alucinado.

Qué se alucinó

• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Panel identified this citation in the plaintiff's brief as apparently fabricated and not an actual JPML decision.
• Citas falsas de jurisprudencia. Plaintiff attributed a quotation/holding to this JPML decision that the Panel found was misrepresented or fabricated in the brief.
• Citas falsas de jurisprudencia. Plaintiff attributed a quotation/holding to this JPML decision that the Panel found was misrepresented or fabricated in the brief.
• Citas falsas de jurisprudencia. Plaintiff attributed a quotation/holding to this Ninth Circuit decision that the Panel found was misrepresented or fabricated in the brief.
• Citas falsas de jurisprudencia. Plaintiff attributed a quotation/holding to this JPML decision that the Panel found was misrepresented or fabricated in the brief.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Panel identified this citation in the plaintiff's brief as apparently fabricated and not an actual JPML order.
• Citas falsas de jurisprudencia. Plaintiff attributed a quotation/holding to this district court decision that the Panel found was misrepresented or fabricated in the brief.

Desenlace

Warning. Sanción profesional: No.

Ficha del caso

Fuentes: aporte de /documents/1504/IN_RE_SNOWFLAKE_INC_DATA_SECURITY_BREACH_LITIGATION.pdf; base de datos de Damien Charlotin.

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