T. v. OpenAI LP

Background

The plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint that was nearly 200 pages long. The complaint included allegations about how political leaders and European governments had reacted to advances in artificial intelligence, as well as several pages about copyright concerns even though the plaintiffs did not assert a copyright claim. It also included policy arguments and requested broad injunctive relief involving an independent body of thought leaders approving uses of artificial-intelligence products.

Ruling

The defendants moved to dismiss. The court granted the motions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2), which requires a complaint to contain a short and plain statement showing that the plaintiffs are entitled to relief. The court explained that excessive length alone usually is not enough for dismissal, but that dismissal is appropriate when a complaint is needlessly long and contains largely irrelevant, distracting, or redundant information.

The court concluded that the complaint’s unnecessary allegations and policy grievances made it nearly impossible to determine whether the plaintiffs had adequately stated legal claims. Because the court could not tell whether the plaintiffs might state a claim after removing the unrelated material, it dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. Any amended complaint is due in 21 days, and responses are due 21 days afterward.

What happens next

The court warned that if an amended complaint continues to emphasize general policy concerns and irrelevant information in a way that prevents a clear presentation of the legal claims, it will be dismissed with prejudice. The court also stated that, even if the plaintiffs plead a claim that passes the initial pleading stage, the way the current complaint was drafted makes it unlikely that the plaintiffs or their counsel can be trusted to adequately and responsibly represent absent class members. The order does not decide whether the plaintiffs’ underlying legal claims are valid.