Courts are beginning to address what constitutes discoverable AI-generated material. A Colorado federal case, V2X, Inc., No. 25-cv-01991 (D. Colo. Mar. 30, 2026), illustrates that such materials may qualify for protection in some circumstances but remain subject to preservation and discovery obligations in others. The precise scope of what must be preserved and how privacy and vendor-hosted data complicate the analysis remain unsettled.
Organizations should audit which employees use GenAI tools, review retention settings on vendor platforms, and suspend auto-deletion features where necessary. Legal holds, document-retention policies, and e-discovery procedures require updating to account for AI-generated ESI and the data-hosting arrangements vendors impose. Failure to preserve relevant AI materials once litigation is foreseeable exposes companies to discovery sanctions and disputes over spoliation.