VERITAS
July 31, 2025 · AI sanctions database

Mirage v. Costco Wholesale Corporation

Mirage v. Costco Wholesale Corporation is one matter in the Veritas record of US court proceedings involving AI-generated citations that could not be verified against the reporters named. The summary below is drawn from the underlying court document, linked at the foot of this page.

Court
C.D. California
Date
July 31, 2025
Party
Lawyer
AI tool
Not identified in the order
Outcome
Motion to remand denied; warning re: citations
Penalty
No monetary penalty in this order.
Warning

What the record shows

The court denied the plaintiff's motion to remand and noted it was unable to find a case (Martinez v. Ford Motor Co.) cited by the plaintiff, observing that any use of AI did not comply with the court's standing order. The court warned that continued citation to cases that do not appear to exist would result in an order to show cause re sanctions.

This entry reflects the court document as filed. The citations at issue could not be located in the reporters named at the time of the order. The reading here is descriptive of the public record and is not legal advice.

Source documents

Primary court document ↗

The test this filing did not run

Every matter in this record shares one mechanism: a citation that did not resolve to an opinion in the reporter named, in a brief that was filed before any verification step ran. Veritas runs that step. The Filing Risk Scanner extracts each citation, resolves it against reporter and public-record sources, and returns a verdict on each one — located, partial, or not located in reporter — before the brief is signed.

Run a free reviewBack to the full tracker →

Filed under · AI sanctions database · C.D. California