# Separate opinions and docket material in US AI research

Judicio editorial worksheet | 9 September 2026

Source guide: https://judicio.ai/blogs/us-courtlistener-opinion-docket-research-boundary

This is an adaptable professional workflow, not a prescribed legal form. Examples in the guide are illustrative. Complete the jurisdiction and matter-specific review before relying on it.

## Matter record

- Matter reference: ____________________
- Prepared by: ____________________
- Reviewed by: ____________________
- Review date: ____________________
- Source/version cut-off: ____________________
- Court / case / document reference: ____________________
- Source type / speaker: ____________________
- Proposition / passage: ____________________
- Outcome and later-treatment checks: ____________________

## Checks

- [ ] Identify whether the source is an opinion, order, motion, docket entry or exhibit.
  Evidence/location: ____________________
  Exception/owner: ____________________
- [ ] Match court, case number, date and document reference.
  Evidence/location: ____________________
  Exception/owner: ____________________
- [ ] Check who made the cited statement and how the court resolved the issue.
  Evidence/location: ____________________
  Exception/owner: ____________________
- [ ] Record coverage gaps and the resources used to address them.
  Evidence/location: ____________________
  Exception/owner: ____________________
- [ ] Assess authority and later treatment separately from retrieval.
  Evidence/location: ____________________
  Exception/owner: ____________________

## Decision

- Status (draft / limited approval / accepted / blocked): ____________________
- Permitted reliance and limitations: ____________________
- Unresolved actions and due dates: ____________________
- Next review trigger: ____________________