Machines on the Witness Stand: Admitting and Attacking AI-Generated Evidence Under Proposed FRE 707

Jonathan M. Redgrave, Partner | Redgrave LLP

Jonathan M. Redgrave is a Partner at Redgrave LLP, where he chairs the firm’s Executive Committee, and is one of the nation’s leading eDiscovery and Information Law attorneys. He represents Fortune 100 companies worldwide on discovery and information management challenges in complex litigation, particularly matters involving novel technologies. He is especially well suited to this program: he has taken part in rules reform efforts on the Federal Rules of Evidence, advises clients on the intersection of AI and machine learning with legal requirements, and is frequently retained as a testifying expert on the preservation, collection, and production of electronically stored information, bringing both a rulemaking perspective and a courtroom view of how electronic evidence is tested.

• Education & Credentials

Mr. Redgrave earned his Juris Doctor, cum laude, from the University of Minnesota Law School in 1991 and his Bachelor of Arts, cum laude, from the University of Notre Dame in 1988. He is admitted to practice in the District of Columbia, Minnesota, and Virginia.

• Recognition & Leadership

Mr. Redgrave is ranked by Chambers as a “Star Individual” in eDiscovery and information governance and at the highest level by Legal 500. In 2002 he helped found The Sedona Conference® Working Group on Electronic Document Retention and Production (WG1), chaired it for its first five years, and now serves as Chair Emeritus. He has served as Editor-in-Chief of “The Sedona Principles®” and also serves as a special master and discovery neutral.

• Professional Involvement

Mr. Redgrave participated extensively in the public comment periods for the 2006 and 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and in reform efforts on the Federal Rules of Evidence. With the Hon. John Facciola (ret.), he led the inaugural Symposium on the Modern Privilege Log, whose work was cited in the 2022 Federal Civil Rules Advisory Committee recommendations on Rule 26, and he testified on the privilege logging changes effective December 1, 2025. He speaks worldwide on cross-border discovery, privacy, data security, and emerging technologies.

• Experience

Mr. Redgrave serves as discovery counsel in multi-district litigation for a major pharmaceutical company, in opioid-related federal and state matters, in national product liability and enforcement matters for an FDA-regulated company, and in a major antitrust class action for several large healthcare and insurance companies. He has also served as counsel of record for amicus briefs addressing discovery rulings.

Benjamin M. Redgrave, Senior Counsel | Redgrave LLP

Benjamin M. Redgrave is Senior Counsel at Redgrave LLP in Chicago, with an extensive background in Information Law issues arising in complex civil litigation and corporate information management. He supports clients through every stage of discovery in complex matters, from preparing protective orders and ESI protocols to managing large-scale document review and production, drafting privilege logs, and handling exhibits and litigation support for jury trials. That hands-on work makes him a strong fit for this program’s trial-practice session: drafting ESI protocols, designing preservation strategies and legal holds, and helping defend spoliation motions are the building blocks of the foundation record and discovery plan that AI-generated evidence demands.

• Education & Credentials

Mr. Redgrave earned his Juris Doctor, cum laude, from the University of Notre Dame Law School in 2018 and his Bachelor of Arts from the University of Notre Dame in 2014. He is admitted to practice in Indiana and Illinois.

• Recognition & Leadership

Mr. Redgrave is a participating fellow in the Lawyers for Civil Justice Fellows Program, a mentorship platform for rising leaders of the defense bar.

• Professional Involvement

Beyond litigation, Mr. Redgrave counsels clients on information governance. He develops and advises on Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policies and other policies governing text messages, emails, and mobile devices, and he helps clients design preservation strategies and discovery “playbooks,” draft legal hold policies, understand their legal hold obligations, implement information governance training, and carry out defensible document right-sizing.

• Experience

Mr. Redgrave’s matters include drafting briefs at the appellate and supreme court levels and assisting with oral argument before the Indiana Supreme Court in a corporate successor liability dispute, and drafting mandamus petitions to the Oklahoma Supreme Court for a large finance and insurance company in discovery disputes. He has negotiated and drafted the governing discovery orders for a major pharmaceutical company in multi-district litigation, assisted with the investigation and defense of spoliation motions in nationwide litigation for a large pharmaceutical corporation, and provided strategic discovery advice to a large healthcare and insurance company in ongoing antitrust litigation. He has also advised a multinational company operating in over 100 countries on eDiscovery, privacy, and international discovery issues.

SESSION 1 – The Rule Being Rewritten Right Now: What Qualifies as AI Evidence and What It Must Prove | 12:00pm – 1:00pm

This session examines proposed Federal Rule of Evidence 707, the first federal evidence rule written specifically for output generated by machines, as it is being redrafted. Published for public comment in August 2025 and drawing more than 70 written comments by the February 16, 2026, deadline, the rule was not advanced in its original form at the Advisory Committee’s May 7, 2026, meeting. The Committee instead narrowed the proposal from all “machine-generated evidence” to “artificial intelligence,” added guidance on reproducibility and independent evaluation, and set a mini-conference for October 15, 2026. Attorneys will learn what the revised proposal covers and excludes, how the Rule 702(a)–(d) reliability factors translate to a system whose credentials are training data rather than education and experience, and why the “simple scientific instruments” carve-out drew the criticism it did. Attendees will leave able to advise clients and try cases under the reasoning of Rule 707 today, using existing Rules 702, 703, and 901, before the rule is finalized.

BREAK | 1:00pm – 1:10pm

SESSION 2 – Building and Breaking the Reliability Record: Foundation, Discovery, and In Limine Practice | 1:10pm – 2:10pm

This session turns proposed Rule 707 into trial practice. Whether the rule is adopted in 2027 or later, the reliability showing it describes is the showing courts are already demanding: Kohls v. Ellison, Concord Music Group v. Anthropic, Matter of Weber, and Ferlito v. Harbor Freight together sketch what a judge will accept and what gets struck. Attorneys will learn how to assemble the foundation record for AI-derived evidence, including validation studies, published error rates, model and version control, training-data provenance, and vendor cooperation secured by contract before the dispute, and how to dismantle an opponent’s showing through operator and vendor discovery, black-box gap requests, and a targeted motion in limine. Attendees will leave with a foundation checklist, a machine-evidence discovery set, an in-limine framework, and the objection language that preserves the issue for appeal.