Defending Employment Claims from AI-Armed Pro Se Plaintiffs: Agency Charge Through Settlement

Joseph C. O’Keefe
Joseph C. O’Keefe
Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Joseph C. O’Keefe is a first-chair employment trial lawyer in Faegre Drinker’s New York office with more than 30 years of experience representing employers in complex disputes, including class actions and multidistrict litigation.

Deborah Brouwer
Deborah Brouwer
Nemeth Bonnette Brouwer PC

Deborah Brouwer is the managing partner and majority owner of Nemeth Bonnette Brouwer PC, a Detroit-based, woman-owned firm that has represented management exclusively in labor and employment disputes for more than 30 years.

Live Video-Broadcast: October 2, 2026

2 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

A Polished Complaint No Longer Means a Lawyer — or a Case

General-purpose AI writing tools have changed pro se employment litigation. Plaintiffs without counsel now file EEOC charges and federal complaints that read as lawyer-drafted: formulaic language, precise legal terminology, boilerplate adverse-action checklists. The polish is new; the legal hollowness underneath often is not.

Miss the AI hallmarks, and a hollow charge gets answered as if it had merit. Skip a facial-deficiency dismissal request, and the investigation runs on. Overlook fabricated citations and invented case names, and Rule 11 leverage is lost. Treat discovery as routine, and costs outrun Rule 26(b)(1) proportionality. Value the case on old math, and the persistence premium eats the reserve.

This two-session program converts the shift into work product: frameworks for targeted position statements, checklists for building a dispositive motion record, and revised settlement valuation approaches. It adds the ethical guardrails — Model Rules 3.3 and 4.3 — and the litigation-hold, HR early case assessment, and EPLI reporting practices AI-assisted charges now demand.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • The AI Pro Se Surge
    Volume data on the AI-accelerated rise in pro se filings, employer exposure, and how pro se plaintiffs are actually using AI tools.
  • Spotting AI-Drafted Filings
    AI hallmarks in EEOC charges — formulaic language, inapplicable protected classes, boilerplate adverse-action checklists — hallucination red flags, and distinguishing AI-drafted from attorney-assisted filings for Rule 11 strategy.
  • Agency-Stage Response
    Position statements, exhaustion defenses, EEOC investigator dynamics, AI-drafted rebuttals, dismissal requests for facially deficient charges, and AI-generated mediation demand packages.
  • Federal Court Defenses
    Rule 11 motions, AI disclosure orders and standing orders on AI use, sanctions precedent, and 12(b)(6) strategies for AI-polished but legally deficient complaints.
  • Discovery Through Settlement
    Proportionality objections and protective orders, discoverability of plaintiff AI prompts and outputs, the summary judgment evidence gap, and persistence-premium settlement valuation.
  • Ethics and Client Management
    Candor to the tribunal under Model Rule 3.3, Model Rule 4.3 boundaries with unrepresented persons, defense counsel’s own AI-use disclosure, litigation holds, HR early case assessment, and EPLI reporting.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: October 2, 2026

  • 12:00 pm – 2:10 pm Eastern
  • 11:00 am – 1:10 pm Central
  • 10:00 am – 12:10 pm Mountain
  • 9:00 am – 11:10 am Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Joseph C. O’Keefe, Partner | Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Joseph C. O’Keefe is a first-chair employment trial lawyer in Faegre Drinker’s New York office with more than 30 years of experience representing employers in complex disputes, including class actions and multidistrict litigation. He counsels employers on the integration of artificial intelligence in the workplace, the emerging AI regulatory framework, and the related risk management and legal issues.

  • Education & Credentials

Joe earned his J.D. from George Washington University Law School in 1991 and his B.A. in Political Science from the College of the Holy Cross in 1988. He is admitted to the bars of New York and New Jersey, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Second and Third Circuits, and the U.S. District Courts for the District of New Jersey, the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York, and the Eastern District of Michigan.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Best Lawyers in America has recognized Joe for Employment Law – Management (2023–2026). Benchmark Litigation named him among its Labor & Employment Stars (2019–2021, 2024), and The Legal 500 United States recommended him for labor and employment disputes defense (2019–2021) and trade secrets litigation (2021). He has also been listed by Super Lawyers (2015–2017, 2024) and received The Legal Aid Society’s Pro Bono Award (2006–2007).

  • Professional Involvement

Joe is a member of the American Bar Association and a frequent speaker and author on artificial intelligence in the workplace, with co-authored pieces in Law360, Bloomberg Law, Westlaw Today, and Global Legal Insights, and firm CLE webinars on AI at work in 2025 and 2026. His pro bono practice includes amicus representations in matters involving gun safety, voter disenfranchisement, and DHS rules concerning student visas.

  • Experience

Joe has taken employment matters to defense verdicts, decisions, and awards before judges, juries, and FINRA and AAA arbitral tribunals across the country. Representative results include a two-week jury trial victory in the District of New Jersey, a defense verdict in an eight-week New Jersey Superior Court jury trial, summary judgment in a gender discrimination and sexual harassment suit affirmed by the Second Circuit, and dismissals affirmed by the New York Court of Appeals and the Appellate Division. His class and collective work spans pay equity, wage and hour, and discrimination claims for clients in financial services, higher education, pharmaceuticals, health care, technology, and other sectors.

 

Deborah Brouwer, Managing Partner | Nemeth Bonnette Brouwer PC

Deborah Brouwer is the managing partner and majority owner of Nemeth Bonnette Brouwer PC, a Detroit-based, woman-owned firm that has represented management exclusively in labor and employment disputes for more than 30 years. Her practice centers on defending employers against claims of race, age, religion, national origin, gender, and disability discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, as well as FLSA, FMLA, and non-competition suits.

  • Education & Credentials

Deborah earned her Juris Doctor from Wayne State University School of Law in 1980, her Master of Arts from the University of Michigan in 1975, and her Bachelor of Arts, With Distinction, from the University of Michigan in 1973. She holds Martindale-Hubbell’s AV rating, the peer-review system’s highest rating for legal ability and ethics (2023). Deborah holds Martindale-Hubbell’s AV rating, the peer-review system’s highest rating for legal ability and ethics (2023).

  • Recognition & Leadership

Deborah has been named to Best Lawyers in America (2021 and 2022) and repeatedly selected as a Michigan Super Lawyer. DBusiness has listed her among its Top Lawyers in appellate law (2020) and in labor and employment law (2022 and 2023). Crain’s Detroit Business recognized her as a Notable Woman in Law (2019) and a Notable Leader in Employment and Labor Law (2023), and Michigan Lawyers Weekly named her a Go-To Lawyer in business law (2020) and to its Women in the Law class (2018).

  • Professional Involvement

Deborah is a frequent commentator on EEOC enforcement, including Law360 coverage of the agency’s information requests to the University of Pennsylvania and its suit against a Coca-Cola distributor. She provides employer training, delivers harassment prevention and civility programs, and conducts workplace investigations on behalf of employers.

  1. Experience

Before joining the firm, Deborah spent twenty years as in-house counsel at the UAW Legal Services Plan, building depth in traditional labor law, ERISA benefits litigation, employment discrimination claims, and legal malpractice defense. She has appeared before administrative agencies including the EEOC, MDCR, MIOSHA, OSHA, and the NLRB, appears frequently before the Michigan Court of Appeals and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, and purchased the firm with partner Terry Bonnette in January 2020, renaming it Nemeth Bonnette Brouwer in 2022.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – Responding to AI-Drafted Pro Se Charges and Complaints in Employment Cases | 12:00pm – 1:00pm

This session equips employment defense attorneys with tactical tools to identify, challenge, and respond to AI-drafted pro se EEOC charges and federal complaints. Attendees will learn how AI is reshaping the volume and surface quality of pro se filings, what structural patterns betray AI-generated charges and complaints, and how to deploy Rule 11 motions, AI disclosure rules, sanctions precedent, and discovery demands to level the litigation field. Attorneys will leave able to spot AI hallmarks at the charge stage, craft targeted position statements, and file dispositive motions that expose the legal deficiencies lurking beneath polished AI-generated language.

BREAK | 1:00pm – 1:10pm

SESSION 2 – Discovery Control, Summary Judgment, and Settlement Valuation in AI-Assisted Pro Se Employment Cases | 1:10pm – 2:10pm

This session equips defense-side employment attorneys with tactical frameworks for managing discovery, building a dispositive motion record, and recalibrating settlement strategy when facing pro se plaintiffs who use AI tools. Attorneys will learn how to identify AI-assisted filings, deploy proportionality objections and protective orders, exploit the gap between AI-generated legal arguments and admissible evidence at summary judgment, and construct revised settlement valuations that account for the persistence premium and inflated costs these plaintiffs create. By the end of this session, attendees will be able to apply concrete, court-tested strategies from sanctions precedent through settlement to AI-assisted pro se employment litigation.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Colorado

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

District of Columbia

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Delaware

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Florida

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Georgia

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Iowa

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Idaho

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Illinois

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Indiana

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Kansas

Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive

Kentucky

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Louisiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Massachusetts

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maryland

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maine

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Michigan

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Minnesota

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Montana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
Nebraska

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

myLawCLE reports attendance to Nebraska on each attorney’s behalf for all programs. Please do not self-report.
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Nevada

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Oklahoma

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

Oregon

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Rhode Island

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

South Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

South Dakota

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Tennessee

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Utah

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Virginia

Not Eligible
2 General Hours

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Washington

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 Law & Legal Hours

Receive CLE credit in Washington via attorney submission.
Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

West Virginia

Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General

Wyoming

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars