Case 2:24-cv-00629-DCJ-TPL Document 5-2 Filed 05/21/24 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:
`227
`
`
`COMMITTEE ON COURT ADMINISTRATION AND CASE MANAGEMENT
`OF THE
`JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES
`
`
`
`Gregory F. Van Tatenhove, Chair
`Joseph F. Bianco
`Nora Barry Fischer
`John Z. Lee
`Trevor N. McFadden
`Susie Morgan
`Michael J. Roemer
`
`
`Robin S. Rosenbaum
`Brendan L. Shannon
`Leo Sorokin
`Kathryn H. Vratil
`Brian C. Wimes
`B. Lynn Winmill
`Melissa Aubin, Clerk Representative
`David A. Levine, Staff
`
`March 15, 2024
`
`MEMORANDUM
`
`Judges, United States District Courts
`District Court Executives
`Clerks, United States District Courts
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`To:
`
`
`
`From:
`
`
`
`RE:
`
`
`Judge Gregory Van Tatenhove
`Chair, Committee on Court Administration and Case Management
`
`GUIDANCE FOR CIVIL CASE ASSIGNMENT IN THE DISTRICT COURTS
`
`At its March 2024 session, the Judicial Conference, upon recommendation of the
`Committee on Court Administration and Case Management (CACM), approved the following
`policy regarding case assignment practices:
`
`District courts should apply district-wide assignment to:
`
`a. civil actions seeking to bar or mandate statewide enforcement of a state law, including
`a rule, regulation, policy, or order of the executive branch or a state agency, whether by
`declaratory judgment and/or any form of injunctive relief; and
`
`b. civil actions seeking to bar or mandate nationwide enforcement of a federal law,
`including a rule, regulation, policy, or order of the executive branch or a federal agency,
`whether by declaratory judgment and/or any form of injunctive relief.
`
`On behalf of the CACM Committee, I write to share the attached Guidance for Civil Case
`Assignment in District Courts. The guidance supports implementation of the above policy, which
`is applicable in instances when the remedy sought has implications beyond the parties before the
`court and the local community, and the importance of having a case heard by a judge with ties to
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Page 2
`
`Case 2:24-cv-00629-DCJ-TPL Document 5-2 Filed 05/21/24 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:
`228
`Guidance for Civil Case Assignment in the District Courts
`
`the local community is not a compelling factor. And it provides general guidance in civil case
`assignment practices.
`
`The guidance is predicated on the Judicial Conference’s longstanding policies supporting
`the random assignment of cases and ensuring that district judges remain generalists. The most
`crucial tool in achieving these policy goals is the case assignment practices or methods employed
`in dividing the business of the court. Case assignment practices or methods that do not reflect the
`longstanding Judicial Conference policy of random case assignment tend to undermine the
`independence of the branch and the trust of the public in the judiciary.
`
`These policies and the accompanying guidance inform the district courts’ statutory
`authority and discretion to divide the business of the court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 137. They
`should not be viewed as impairing a court’s authority or discretion. Instead, they set out various
`ways for courts to align their case assignment practices with the longstanding Judicial Conference
`policy of random case assignment. Simply put, these policies should serve the purpose of
`securing a “just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.” Fed. R.
`Civ. P. 1.
`
`If you have any questions about the guidance or policy, please contact Erin Butler
`Conner, Administrative Office’s Court Services Office, at 202-502-3217.
`
`
`Attachment
`
`cc: Chief Judges, United States Courts of Appeals
`
`Circuit Executives
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00629-DCJ-TPL Document 5-2 Filed 05/21/24 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:
`229
`
`Attachment
`
`GUIDANCE FOR CIVIL CASE ASSIGNMENT IN DISTRICT COURTS1
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`The Judicial Conference’s longstanding policies supporting the random assignment of
`
`cases and ensuring that district judges remain generalists2 deter both judge-shopping and the
`assignment of cases based on the perceived merits or abilities of a particular judge.
`
`The tools used to accomplish random case assignment are a court’s divisional and
`judicial case assignment methods employed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 137. Under 28 U.S.C.
`§ 137(a), “[t]he business of a court having more than one judge shall be divided among the
`judges as provided by the rules and orders of the court.”3 This statute provides individual courts
`wide latitude to establish case assignment systems, permitting flexibility in managing their
`caseloads efficiently and in a manner that best suits the various needs of the district and the
`communities they serve. The chief judge is “responsible for the observance of such rules and
`orders” and is charged with “divid[ing] the business and assign[ing] the cases so far as such rules
`and orders do not otherwise prescribe.” The statute also provides that “[i]f the district judges in
`any district are unable to agree upon the adoption of rules or orders for that purpose the judicial
`council of the circuit shall make the necessary orders.” Additionally, 28 U.S.C. § 332(d)(1)
`provides that “each [circuit] judicial council shall make all necessary and appropriate orders for
`the effective and expeditious administration of justice within its circuit.”
`
`At its March 2024 session, the Judicial Conference, upon recommendation of the
`Committee on Court Administration and Case Management (CACM), approved the
`following policy regarding case assignment practices:4
`
`District courts should apply district-wide assignment to:
`
`
`
`a.
`
`
`b.
`
`civil actions seeking to bar or mandate statewide enforcement of a state
`law, including a rule, regulation, policy, or order of the executive branch
`or a state agency, whether by declaratory judgment and/or any form of
`injunctive relief; and
`
`civil actions seeking to bar or mandate nationwide enforcement of a
`federal law, including a rule, regulation, policy, or order of the executive
`branch or a federal agency, whether by declaratory judgment and/or any
`form of injunctive relief.
`
`
`
`1 Issued March 2024, by the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case
`Management.
`
`
`
`
`3 The division of the business of the courts is not solely accomplished through rules and orders.
`There are a variety of practices and policies utilized to accomplish this objective.
`
`
`
`2 See JCUS-SEP 1995, p. 46; JCUS-MAR 1999, p. 13; JCUS-MAR 2000, p. 13.
`
`4 JCUS-MAR 2024, p. __.
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00629-DCJ-TPL Document 5-2 Filed 05/21/24 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:
`230
`GUIDANCE FOR CIVIL CASE ASSIGNMENT IN DISTRICT COURTS
`
`The guidance set forth below applies to all civil cases, including patent cases.5 It does
`
`not apply to criminal cases as there are unique factors and considerations applicable to criminal
`cases that are not implicated in civil cases. Bankruptcy cases were not specifically considered in
`drafting the guidance. Case assignment in the bankruptcy context remains under study.
`
`GUIDANCE
`
`
`Courts are encouraged to conduct regular review of their civil case assignment practices,
`particularly courts with single-Article III judge divisions.
`
`While recognizing the statutory authority and discretion that district courts have with
`respect to case assignment, and that the division of the business of the district court among the
`judges is accomplished through various case assignment practices, to assist with developing
`these practices and aligning them with Judicial Conference policy, the CACM Committee shares
`the following guidance:
`
`1.
`
`Public confidence in the case assignment process requires transparency.
`Therefore, consider incorporating case assignment practices into rules and orders
`as opposed to internal plans or policies. To the extent a court currently maintains
`internal plans or policies, the court should make them accessible to the public on
`the court’s website.
`
`In crafting civil case assignment practices, consider various issues that generate
`concern, such as achieving randomness in assignments; ensuring the district
`judges remain generalists; balancing caseload among judges in the district;
`avoiding and addressing recusals, conflicts of interest, and appearances of
`impropriety; considering potentially disqualifying events impacting assignments,
`such as injury, illness, or incapacitation of a judge; managing related cases; and
`promoting the efficiency, convenience, and other benefits of parties’ cases being
`heard by local judges.
`
`Regardless of where a case is filed, avoid case assignment practices that result in
`the likelihood that a case will be assigned to a particular judge, absent a
`determination that proceeding in a particular geographic location is appropriate.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`
`
`
`5 The CACM Committee presented its “Report on the Patent Case Assignment Study in the
`
`District Courts” (Patent Report) to the Judicial Conference at its September 2023 session, and the
`Secretary of the Judicial Conference transmitted it to Congress on October 3, 2023. The Patent Report
`concluded that the most effective tools in achieving the shared goal of both Congress and the Judicial
`Conference of promoting random case assignment are the divisional and judicial case assignment
`practices and policies employed in dividing the business of a district court as contemplated by 28 U.S.C.
`§ 137, which allows each district court to divide the business of the court in a way that best serves the
`district. The Patent Report also recognized that district courts utilize various practices and policies in
`dividing the business of the court to achieve randomness in the divisional and judicial assignment of
`cases, and specifically in single-Article III judge divisions. Given the complexities associated with case
`assignment, the CACM Committee concluded that guidance on achieving random case assignment would
`benefit courts and that regular review of case assignment plans should be encouraged.
`2
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00629-DCJ-TPL Document 5-2 Filed 05/21/24 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:
`231
`GUIDANCE FOR CIVIL CASE ASSIGNMENT IN DISTRICT COURTS
`
`
`4.
`
`
`5.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Employ case assignment practices that successfully avoid the likelihood that a
`case will be assigned to a particular judge, such as:
`
`(a) District-wide assignment of all cases;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(b) District-wide assignment of certain cases based on Nature of Suit
`code, case categories, or case-type; or
`
`(c) Shared case assignments between the judge in a single-judge division
`with a judge or judges in another division or divisions.
`
`Judicial Conference policy states that district courts should apply district-
`wide assignment in civil actions seeking to bar or mandate statewide or
`nationwide enforcement of a state or federal law, including a rule,
`regulation, policy, or order of the executive branch or a state or federal
`agency, whether by declaratory judgment and/or any form of injunctive
`relief.6
`
`
`The policy is applicable in instances when the remedy sought has implications
`beyond the parties before the court and the local community, and the importance
`of having a case heard by a judge with ties to the local community is not a
`compelling factor.
`
`To facilitate assignment and avoid circumvention of a district-wide assignment
`policy, courts should consider entering a standing or general order, or
`promulgating a local rule addressing the following:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(a) If such relief is sought when the case is opened, note on the JS-44
`(Civil Cover Sheet) in section “VI. CAUSE OF ACTION” that the
`remedy sought has implications beyond the parties before the court or that
`the case seeks to bar or mandate statewide or nationwide enforcement of a
`state or federal law.
`
`(b) If such relief is sought after the case is opened, require the party
`seeking such relief to prominently display such information in the case
`caption upon filing the motion.
`
`(c) Include in the court’s case assignment practices a provision addressing
`the filing of an amended complaint. For example, if an amended
`
`complaint or motion seeking such relief is filed within thirty (30) days of
`when the case is opened, or before significant steps have been taken in the
`action, the judge to whom the case is assigned should transfer the case
`back to the Clerk of Court for reassignment on the district-wide wheel.
`
`
`6 JCUS-MAR 2024, p. __.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-00629-DCJ-TPL Document 5-2 Filed 05/21/24 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:
`232
`GUIDANCE FOR CIVIL CASE ASSIGNMENT IN DISTRICT COURTS
`
`
` CONTACT INFORMATION
`
`Questions or comments concerning this guidance and assistance in its implementation
`
`may be directed to Policy Staff to the Committee on Court Administration and Case
`Management.
`
`
`
`4
`
`