Counsel and self-represented litigants (pro se") are responsible for providing the Court with compete and accurate representations in any submission (including filings, demonstratives, evidence, and oral arguments).

Counsel and self-represented litigants must make all diligent efforts to ensure that any filings prepared with the assistance of generative artificial intelligence is genuinely and thoroughly reviewed for factual, ethical, and legal accuracy prior to submission to the Court and in the matter.

Any discovery responses, including but not limited to Answers to Interrogatories, Rule 213(f) Disclosures, and Rule 214 Document Productions, that are generated, in whole or in part, using artificial intelligence (AI) tools must be verified for factual accuracy, legal sufficiency, and compliance with Illinois Supreme Court Rules and Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct.

Parties utilizing TAR software (also called predictive coding, computer assisted review, or supervised machine learning) to search and identify relevant documents to disclose during the discovery process must notify opposing counsel in their response that the documents have been identified by use of this technology.

- 3. Certification Requirement: An Attorney must file a signed certification attesting that: - • Have personally reviewed the discovery compliance; - • Have verified that the answers and responses are accurate and complete based on personal/individual legal judgment; and - • Not relying solely on the AI tool's output to determine the sufficiency or completeness of the responses. (See attached Sample Certification Regarding the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Discovery Responses, APPENDIX 1).

At least ninety (90) days prior to trial, any party that seeks to introduce evidence enhanced or generated by an artificial intelligence (AI) program shall give proper and timely notice as well as disclose such evidence to the opposing party via affidavit of the attorney or analyst with the following: - 1. That Exhibit "X" is evidence that was enhanced or generated by technology utilizing AI, specifically describing what portion of the evidence was generated and/or enhanced; - 2. Name, identify, and/or describe the technology that had been used to enhance the evidence, the date it was enhanced and/or generated, how it operates, what steps have been taken to enhance the evidence with such technology, and any algorithm used to enhance or create the evidence; - 3. Certification that the evidence has been reviewed by a competent expert or attorney for accuracy and compliance; - 4. Documentation (or a description of the method used) to demonstrate the AI tool's reliability and validity in producing or enhancing the evidence;

If any expert witness relies on AI or AI-generated data or tools in forming their opinions, their report shall include a detailed description of the AI used, how it was applied, and a demonstration of its reliability in forming those opinions. An expert submitting or utilizing AI content must explain in non-technical yet substantive terms the following: the system that was used in its creation; explain and describe any algorithms used; how and with what input such system was trained; whether the system is open or closed; how the system reached its particular decision, recommendation, or prediction; and why the training and system are reliable and trustworthy.

This form is to be completed and signed by any attorney submitting discovery compliance (answers and responses) before this Court whereby artificial intelligence (AI) tools have been used in the preparation, drafting, and/or review of such discovery compliance. I, the undersigned attorney, hereby certify the following regarding the discovery compliance submitted and served in this matter: 1. I have reviewed all discovery compliance submitted to ensure that the discovery compliance is factually accurate, complete, and responsive. 2. To the extent any AI tool (ex. ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Co-Counsel, and/or similar software) has been used to assist in drafting or organizing discovery compliance, I have verified that all content has been reviewed and edited by counsel for legal sufficiency, accuracy, and compliance of all applicable rules. 3. I have not relied on AI tools to generate objections or answers/responses without applying professional judgment and tailoring to the specific facts and legal context of the case. 4. No confidential or privileged material has been entered into any AI system that stores or transmits information to external servers, except where such use is permitted by Protective Order or by prior agreement of the parties. 5. The use of AI in preparing discovery compliance has not compromised the integrity of any factual statement, legal objection, or disclosure requirement under Illinois law. I, hereby certify, that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.