Flux Drive Must Pay Attorney's Fees, Although AI was Used

GRAND RAPIDS, MI. - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit on Oct. 30, 2026, affirmed the dismissal of the Rong defendants in Flux Drive, Inc. et al. v. Sparks et al., Nos. 25-1308, 26-1013 & 26-1292, holding that Colorado lacked personal jurisdiction over Rong.

The court held that the plaintiffs had not made the required showing to subject the Rong defendants to suit in Colorado, rejecting the jurisdictional theories advanced on appeal. The decision leaves the district court's dismissal of those defendants in place.

Strikingly, the court also rejected Flux Drive's challenge to the fee awards based on defense counsel's use of artificial intelligence. It held that the use of AI did not by itself render the hours claimed unreasonable, and affirmed the awards. The initial fee award was $114,663.11, with total reports estimating fees of $185,000.

Flux stands apart from other AI use cases because it is the first of its kind where AI use was successful and publicly disclosed as opposed to other notable cases where both judges and lawyers were caught using AI that eventually hallucinated cases and provided inaccurate information.

Flux Drive, Inc. v. Sparks, Nos. 25-1308, 26-1013 & 26-1292 (10th Cir. Oct. 30, 2026); https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/010111536638.pdf