The Office of the Circuit Executive would like to acknowledge

the following for their contributions to the 2007 Annual Report:

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski

Senior District Judge Robert J. Bryan

Cathy A. Catterson, Circuit and Court of Appeals Executive

Molly Dwyer, Clerk, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Harold Marenus, Clerk, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel

Robert Duncan, Chief Pretrial Services Officer 

The Ninth Circuit’s newest 

circuit judge, the Hon. 

N. Randy Smith, dons his 

robe during an investiture 

ceremony last August in 

Pocatello, Idaho.
Ninth Circuit Overview

Judicial Council Mission Statement 2

Foreword by Chief Judge Alex Kozinski 3

Ninth Circuit Overview 5

Judicial Council and Administration 6

Judicial Transitions

New Judges 10

New Senior Judges 14

In Memoriam 15

Ninth Circuit Highlights

Ninth Circuit Initiatives 18

Hispanic Panel A First in the Nation 22

Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference 23

Conference Award Presentations 25

Elevation of New Chief Judge for Ninth Circuit 27

New Circuit Executive, Chief Circuit Mediator Named 28

Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Marks Milestone 30

Central District Court Honors First Woman Chief Judge 31

Court of Appeals Hosts Asian Pacific Heritage Event, Exhibit 32

Federal Courts Do Their Part in COOP Planning 33

Court IT Staff Gathers in Los Angeles 34

Space & Facilities

Tacoma Courthouse Provides Unique Mix of History and Art 36

Courthouses Under Construction and in Design Phase 38

The Work of the Courts

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 40

District Courts 44

Bankruptcy Courts 48

Bankruptcy Appellate Panel 50

Magistrate Judge Matters 51

Federal Public Defenders 53

Probation Offices 55

Pretrial Services Offices 57

District by District Caseloads 59

Table of Contents

 (All statistics provided by the Administrative

 Office of the United States Courts)
2 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

The Mission of the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit is to support the effective and expeditious 

administration of justice and the safeguarding of fairness in the administration of the courts within 

the circuit. To do so, it will promote the fair and prompt resolution of disputes, ensure the effective 

discharge of court business, prevent any form of invidious discrimination, and enhance public 

understanding of, and confidence in the judiciary.

Mission stateMent

the Judicial council of the ninth circuit

1) Chief Judge Alex Kozinski; 2) Circuit Judge Sidney R. 

Thomas; 3) Cathy A. Catterson, Circuit and Court of Appeals 

Executive; 4) Circuit Judge Marsha S. Berzon; 5) Senior 

Circuit Judge David R. Thompson; 6) District Clerk Sue Beitia 

(HI); 7) Bankruptcy Clerk Bernie F. McCarthy (MT); 8) Robert 

J. Duncan, Chief Pretrial Services Officer (CAE); 9) Circuit 

Judge M. Margaret McKeown; 10) Chief District Judge Irma 

E. Gonzalez (CAS); 11) Chief District Judge Alicemarie H. 

Stotler (CAC); 12) District Judge Donald W. Molloy (MT); 13) 

Jerrold G. Cooley, Chief Probation Officer (MT); 14) District Judge Charles R. Breyer (CAN); 15) Senior District Judge Stephen M. 

McNamee (AZ); 16) Chief Bankruptcy Judge Michael S. McManus (CAE); 17) Chief District Judge Ancer L. Haggerty (OR); 18) 

Senior District Judge Terry J. Hatter, Jr. (CAC); 19) Magistrate Judge Anthony J. Battaglia (CAS). Not shown, Circuit Judge Susan 

P. Graber and Chief District Judge Robert S. Lasnik (WAW)

4

6

7 8 9 10 11 12

13

14 15 16 17 18 19

2 1 3 5
Foreword 3

The 2007 Ninth Circuit Annual Report profiles the federal courts serving nine 

western states and two Pacific island jurisdictions. The annual report provides 

statistical summaries of the work done by judges and judiciary staff over the 

last year, and highlights important events and trends in our courts. We hope you find 

the information useful and welcome your feedback.

This is my first report as Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit, having assumed the gavel in 

December 2007. I came into the office aware that the judiciary faces challenges, but 

confident that our courts will continue to provide a high level of service to litigants 

and the general public. The credit goes to our judges and to the many court staff who 

contribute to the administration of justice. I look forward to working with all of them 

over the next few years.

Filling vacancies on the federal bench is always welcome news. In 2007, judges of the 

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals warmly greeted a new colleague, Judge N. Randy 

Smith, who was confirmed by the Senate in February. His formal investiture was held 

in August before family, friends and colleagues in his hometown of Pocatello, Idaho.

The arrival of Judge Smith brought the court to nearly full strength, with 27 of our 28 

judgeships filled. In addition, Congress late in the year approved a 29th judgeship for 

the court, which will be filled on or after January 1, 2009. It is the first new judgeship 

to be authorized for the court since 1984.

Also during the year, the Senate filled judicial vacancies on the district courts of the circuit. 

Eight new judges were confirmed, four of them in the Central District of California, our 

busiest trial court. Still, district courts ended the year with four vacancies.

More judges are sorely needed. Several of our district courts are laboring under heavy 

caseloads generated by increased law enforcement efforts along the Mexican border, 

and by a rising tide of prisoner litigation. Legislation to create some new judgeships 

was pending in Congress at year’s end, while a judgeship bill pertaining to all of the 

nation’s federal courts was anticipated in 2008. We await the outcome of both efforts.

On the administrative side, Cathy A. Catterson, the longtime clerk of court for 

the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, was selected to head the Office of the Circuit 

Executive, the administrative arm of the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit. Along 

with her new duties, Ms. Catterson gained the new title of Circuit and Court of 

Appeals Executive.

Assuring adequate space and facilities for the courts is an ongoing concern. We 

welcome the effort undertaken nationally by the judiciary and General Services 

Administration to work out fair and reasonable rents for courthouses and other 

court facilities. Several of our judges and staff are involved, and we look forward to 

a successful resolution of the issue. We continue to work hard for new courthouses 

Foreword

chief judge

Alex Kozinski
4 Annual Report 2007

2007 Margaret Brent Women Lawyers of Achievement 

Award from the American Bar Association’s Commission 

on Women in the Profession. The award recognizes 

professional excellence, influence on other women in the 

profession and leadership in expanding the opportunities 

available to women practicing law.

Senior District Judge Consuelo B. Marshall, the first 

woman to serve as chief judge of the Central District of 

California, was recognized with the unveiling of an official 

portrait that now adorns the ceremonial courtroom of 

the federal courthouse in downtown Los Angeles. It was 

another in a string of firsts for Judge Marshall, also the 

first African-American woman to be appointed to a federal 

court west of the Mississippi, and the first woman attorney 

hired to work in the offices of the Los Angeles 

city attorney.

Also noteworthy was the first all-Hispanic appellate panel 

to sit in any of the nation’s federal courts of appeal. Ninth 

Circuit Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw and Senior Circuit 

Judges Arthur Alarcón and Ferdinand Fernandez earned 

that distinction when they sat in Seattle last July. They are 

among six Hispanic judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of 

Appeals, the most of any circuit court in the country.

Elsewhere in the circuit, the District of Idaho announced 

the selection of its first woman judge. Attorney Candy Dale 

will be seated next year as a magistrate judge in Boise.

Through its many committees, the Ninth Circuit continues 

to be among the most active and innovative in advancing 

the administration of justice. This year’s report highlights 

the work of our Pacific Islands Committee, which is 

expanding judicial education opportunities for judges 

in the northern Pacific, and the Public Information 

and Community Outreach (PICO) Committee, which 

organized a two-day media conference hosted by the court 

of appeals in Pasadena.

We invite you to review this report further for more 

information about the work of the courts of the West.

in San Diego and Los Angeles to meet the circuit’s most 

pressing space needs. Both projects remain out of reach 

due to market-driven escalation in costs.

I can report better news from Montana, where work is 

well under way on a new courthouse in Great Falls, on the 

banks of the Missouri River, and in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. 

The renovation of the William Kenzo Nakamura U.S. 

Courthouse in Seattle, which will be used by the court of 

appeals, is also on track.

On the operational side, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 

had a productive year, terminating more cases than it 

opened for the second consecutive year. We continue to be 

the busiest appellate court in the nation with 12,685 new 

cases filed in 2007. The court terminated 13,300 cases for 

the year, with judges deciding just over half of those appeals 

on the merits. The remaining terminations were procedural 

in nature, including jurisdictional defects, settlements and 

FRAP 42(b) dismissals.

Appeals of decisions by the Board of Immigration Appeals 

(a division of the Department of Justice) made up more 

than a third of the appellate caseload. The number of BIA 

cases, however, declined for the second consecutive year. 

The court had seen a huge increase in immigration cases 

between 2001 and 2005 as a result of a Department of 

Justice push to clear its backlog.

New case filings were up slightly in the district courts 

of the Ninth Circuit, which accounted for 17.5 percent 

of all federal filings nationally. Criminal filings were up 

15.3 percent, fueled by increases in immigration and drug 

offenses. Civil filings were down slightly.

Our bankruptcy courts, which saw filings plummet 

following the 1995 enactment of bankruptcy reform laws, 

reported a major increase in new filings in 2007, mostly 

from individuals.

A number of our judges were recognized during the year. 

Circuit Judge Marsha S. Berzon received the prestigious 
Ninth Circuit Overview 5

The United States Courts for the Ninth Circuit consists of the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the federal trial and bankruptcy courts in 15 

federal judicial districts, and associated administrative units that provide various 

services to the court.

Judicial districts within the Ninth Circuit are the Districts of Alaska, Arizona, Central 

California, Eastern California, Northern California, Southern California, Hawaii, 

Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Eastern Washington, Western Washington, the 

U.S. Territory of Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. 

The establishment of the Ninth Circuit in 1866 began the development of the federal 

judicial system for the western United States. Today, it is the largest and busiest of 

federal circuits.

Judges serving on the circuit and district courts are known as Article 

III judges, a reference to the article in the Constitution establishing 

the federal judiciary. Article III judges are nominated by the President, 

confirmed by the Senate and serve for life. The Ninth Circuit Court 

of Appeals has been authorized 28 judgeships and ended 2007 with 

one vacant position. For most of the year, the district courts were 

authorized 112 judgeships, four of which were vacant at year’s end. 

Federal courts also rely on senior circuit and senior district judges to 

assist with their workload. These are Article III judges who are eligible 

for retirement but have chosen to continue working with a reduced 

caseload. In the Ninth Circuit, 28 senior circuit judges sat on appellate 

panels, served on circuit and national judicial committees, and handled 

a variety of administrative matters. In the district courts, 46 senior 

judges heard cases, presided over procedural matters, served on 

committees and conducted other business during 2007.

In addition to Article III judges, the federal bench includes Article I judges, who serve 

as magistrate judges in the district courts and bankruptcy judges in the bankruptcy 

courts. Appointed by the court of appeals, bankruptcy judges serve terms of 14 

years. Magistrate judges are appointed by the individual district courts and hold their 

positions for eight years. 

In 2007, bankruptcy courts in the Ninth Circuit were authorized 68 permanent and 

five temporary judgeships. The district courts were authorized 95 full-time and 11 

part-time magistrate judges; several courts also utilized recalled magistrate judges. 

Overall, the Ninth Circuit courts experienced increased caseloads in 2007. Unless 

otherwise noted, statistics in this report cover the 2007 calendar year.

Ninth Circuit Overview
6 Annual Report 2007

Judicial Council & Administration

The Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit is the governing body of the United 

States Courts for the Ninth Circuit. The council’s statutory mission is to 

support the effective and expeditious administration of justice and the 

safeguarding of fairness in the administration of the courts. It has statutory authority 

to “make all necessary and appropriate orders for the effective and expeditious 

administration of justice within its circuit,” [28 U.S.C. 332(d)(1)]. 

In 2007, the Judicial Council reorganized by changing the total number of voting 

members from 13 to 11. The voting members consist of five circuit judges, five 

district judges, and the chief judge of the circuit as the presiding officer. The 11 

voting members are looked upon as a “judicial board of directors.” 

The reorganization also included creating nine non-voting observer members. 

The non-voting members consist of the district judge representative to the 

Judicial Conference of the United States; the president of the District Judges 

Association; the chair of the Conference of Chief District Judges; the chair of 

the Conference of the Chief Bankruptcy Judges; the chair of the Magistrate 

Judges Executive Board; the chair of the District Clerks Liaison Committee; 

the chair of the Bankruptcy Clerks Liaison Committee; and representatives 

of the chief probation officers and of the chief pretrial services officers. 

Chaired by the chief judge of the circuit, the Judicial Council provides 

policy guidance and leadership to courts of the circuit. It meets quarterly 

to review issues and resolve problems, conducting additional business by 

conference call or mail ballot when necessary.

The Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit also has been delegated 

responsibilities by the Judicial Conference of the United States, the 

national governing body for the federal courts. These responsibilities 

include authorizing senior judge staffing levels and pay. The council 

accomplishes most of its work through committees. 

Conference of Chief District Judges

The Conference of Chief District Judges advises the Judicial 

Council of the Ninth Circuit about the administration of justice 

in each of the circuit’s 15 district courts. The conference, 

which is comprised of the chief district judge of each district, 

meets twice a year. Chief District Judge B. Lynn Winmill of 

the District of Idaho served as chair of the conference from 

June 2006 through March 2007. He was succeeded by Chief 

District Judge Donald Molloy of the District of Montana 

whose term will in expire in February 2008.
Ninth Circuit Overview 7

Associated Court Units

Ninth Circuit courts also rely on several important 

court-related agencies to ensure the fair administration 

of justice. The district courts maintain oversight of 

U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services offices, which 

are responsible for supervision of criminal defendants 

and background investigations and reports. All but one 

judicial district is served by federal public defender and 

community defenders who represent indigent defendants 

unable to afford private counsel. The Northern Mariana 

Islands relies on a Criminal Justice Act panel of attorneys 

for such representation.

Ninth Circuit Library System

The Ninth Circuit Library System assists judges, attorneys, 

court staff and the public through a network of 24 law 

libraries housed in courthouses throughout the western states. 

The primary mission of court librarians is to provide research 

services to judges and their staff. Research librarians assist 

law clerks on case-related research by providing guidance 

and recommendations, offering training opportunities, 

and performing direct research on more complex topics. 

Librarians also conduct research to assist court executives and 

judges in the administration of local courts and on matters 

involving committees of the Judicial Council of the Ninth 

Circuit and the Judicial Conference of the U.S. Library 

resources are also made available to the bar and public with 

the level of access determined by local judges.

Office of the Circuit Executive

The Office of the Circuit Executive provides staff support 

to the council and implements its administrative decisions 

and policies. By statute, the circuit executive is the 

administrative assistant to the chief judge of the circuit and 

secretary to the Judicial Council. The circuit executive and 

his staff assist in identifying circuit-wide needs, conducting 

studies, proactively developing and implementing policies, 

providing training, public information and human resources 

support. Circuit executive staff also coordinates building and 

automation projects, and advises the council on procedural 

and ethical matters. The Office of the Circuit Executive 

provides management and technical assistance to courts 

within the circuit upon request. It also administers the 

annual Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference.

Conference of Chief Bankruptcy Judges

The Conference of Chief Bankruptcy Judges advises the 

Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit on the administration 

of the bankruptcy courts within the circuit. The chair of 

the conference is a non-voting member of the council. 

The conference, which also meets twice per year, consists 

of chief bankruptcy judges from each district and the 

presiding judge of the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate 

Panel (BAP). Chief Bankruptcy Judge Ralph B. Kirscher 

of the District of Montana chaired the conference from 

November 2006 to May 2007, when Chief Bankruptcy 

Judge Michael S. McManus of the Eastern District of 

California became chair. Judge McManus will chair the 

conference until late May 2008.

Magistrate Judges Executive Board

The Magistrate Judges Executive Board provides a channel 

of communication between the Judicial Council of the 

Ninth Circuit and the more than 100 full-time, part-time 

and recalled magistrate judges serving in the district 

courts. The 14-member board meets twice a year and 

holds a session with all magistrate judges at the annual 

circuit conference. The chair of the board serves on the 

council as an observer. 

Magistrate Judge Anthony J. Battaglia of the Southern 

District of California is the current chair. His term began 

in October 2006 and will expire in September 2008.

Clerks of Court

Day-to-day management of the courts rests with the chief 

judges and clerks or district executives of the court of 

appeals and each of the district and bankruptcy courts. 

The clerks’ offices process new cases and appeals, handle 

docketing functions, respond to procedural questions 

from the public and bar, and provide adequate judicial 

staff resources. The clerk of court for the court of appeals 

also supervises the work of the Circuit Mediation Office 

and the Office of the Staff Attorneys, which includes the 

research, motions, case management, and pro se units. 

The Office of the Appellate Commissioner, also located in 

the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Clerk’s Office, reviews 

Criminal Justice Act vouchers for cases that come before 

the court of appeals.
8 Annual Report 2007

Executive Committee Office of the

Circuit Executive

Cathy A. Catterson, Circuit & Court of Appeals Executive

Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski

Judicial Conference 

Executive Committee

Lawyer 

Representatives 

Coordinating 

Committee

Association of

Judicial Officers

Conference of Chief 

District Judges

Conference of Chief 

Bankruptcy Judges

Magistrate Judges 

Executive Board

Liaison Committees

District Clerks

Bankruptcy Clerks

Chief Probation 

& Chief Pretrial 

Services Officers

Advisory Standing 

Committees

Advisory Board

Alternative Dispute 

Resolution

Capital Case

Court-Council 

Committee on 

Bankruptcy Judge 

Appointments

Federal Public 

Defenders

Information 

Technology

Jury Instructions

Jury Trial 

Improvement

Ninth Circuit

Judges Education

Pacific Islands

Public Information & 

Community Outreach

Self Represented 

Litigants (Pro Se)

Space & Security

Wellness III
Judicial TransiTions
10 Annual Report 2007

Circuit Judge

Judge N. Randy Smith was 

appointed to the Ninth Circuit 

Court of Appeals on March 19, 

2007. Prior to his appointment 

to the federal bench, Judge Smith 

served as a district judge for 

the State of Idaho Sixth Judicial 

Circuit from 1995 to 2007. Judge 

Smith was an associate then partner at Merrill & Merrill, 

Chartered, in Pocatello, Idaho, from 1982 to 1995. He 

has been an adjunct professor at Idaho State University 

since 1984. He was an adjunct professor at Boise State 

University from 1979 to 1981; and an associate then 

assistant general counsel at J.R. Simplot Company from 

1977 to 1981. Judge Smith received his B.S. from Brigham 

Young University in 1974, and his J.D. from Brigham Young 

University, J. Reuben Clark School of Law in 1977. He 

maintains chambers in Pocatello.

District Judges 

Judge Valerie Baker Fairbank was 

appointed a district judge for the 

Central District of California on 

February 16, 2007. Prior to her 

appointment to the federal bench, 

Judge Fairbank served as a 

Los Angeles County Superior Court 

judge, from 1987 to 2007, and the 

Los Angeles Municipal Court, from 1986 to 1987. She was 

previously an associate then partner at Lillick, McHose & 

Charles in Los Angeles from 1980 to 1986, and an assistant 

U.S. attorney for the Central District of California from 

1977 to 1980. She was an associate at Overton, Lyman & 

Prince in Los Angeles from 1975 to 1977. Judge Fairbank 

received her B.A. in 1971 and her M.A. in 1972 from 

the University of California at Santa Barbara and her J.D. 

in 1975 from the University of California at Los Angeles 

School of Law. She maintains chambers in Los Angeles

Judge Philip S. Gutierrez was 

appointed a district judge for the 

Central District of California on 

February 16, 2007. Prior to his 

appointment to the federal bench, 

Judge Gutierrez served as a Los 

Angeles County Superior Court 

judge, from 1997 to 2007. He was a 

managing partner at Cotkin & Collins in Los Angeles, from 

1988 to 1987, and an associate at Kern & Wooley in Los 

Angeles, from 1986 to 1988. Judge Gutierrez received his 

B.A. from the University of Notre Dame in 1981, and his 

J.D. from the University of California at Los Angeles School 

of Law in 1984. He maintains chambers in Los Angeles.

Judge Richard A. Jones was 

appointed a district judge for the 

Western District of Washington 

on October 29, 2007. Prior to his 

appointment to the federal bench, 

Judge Jones served as a King County 

(Washington) Superior Court judge, 

from 1994 to 2007. He was an 

assistant U.S. attorney for the Western District of Washington 

from 1988 to 1994; an associate attorney at Bogle and Gates 

New Judges
Judicial Transitions 11

in Seattle from 1983 to 1988; a staff attorney, Port of Seattle, 

from 1978 to 1983; and a deputy prosecutor, King County, 

from 1975 to 1978. Judge Jones received his B.A. from 

Seattle University in 1972, and his J.D. from the University 

of Washington School of Law in 1975. He maintains 

chambers in Seattle.

 

Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill was 

appointed a district judge for the 

Eastern District of California on 

February 2, 2007. Prior to his 

appointment, Judge O’Neill served 

as a magistrate judge for the Eastern 

District of California from 1999 

until his elevation to district judge. 

He served as a Fresno County Superior Court judge, from 

1990 to 1999. Judge O’Neill was an adjunct professor at San 

Joaquin College of Law from 1986 to 1992. He was a partner 

at McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte and Carruth in 

Fresno, from 1970 to 1990. Judge O’Neill received his B.A. 

from the University of California at Berkeley in 1973, his 

M.P.A. from Golden Gate University in 1976, and his J.D. 

from the University of California, Hastings College of the 

Law, in 1979. He clerked for Judge Robert F. Kane of the 

California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, from 

1976 to 1977 and in 1979. He maintains chambers in Fresno.

Judge Janis Lynn Sammartino was 

appointed a district judge for the 

Southern District of California 

on September 21, 2007. Prior to 

her appointment to the federal 

bench, Judge Sammartino served 

as a San Diego County Superior 

Court judge, from 1995 until 

her appointment to the district court. She served as a San 

Diego Municipal Court judge, from 1994 to 1995, and was 

a deputy city attorney in the San Diego City Attorney’s 

Office, from 1976 to 1994. Judge Sammartino received 

her A.B. from Occidental College in 1972, and her J.D. 

from the University of Notre Dame Law School in 1975. 

Following law school, she clerked for Judge Douglas Seely 

of Indiana Superior Court, St. Joseph County, from 1975 

to 1976. She maintains chambers in San Diego.

Judge Benjamin Hale Settle was 

appointed a district judge for the 

Western District of Washington 

on July 2, 2007. Prior to his 

appointment, Judge Settle was a 

founder and partner of the law firm 

of Settle & Johnson PLLC for 30 

years in Shelton, Washington. The 

firm engaged in a general practice with emphasis on civil 

litigation, business, municipal, and real property law. While 

with the firm, he served as Shelton city attorney and general 

counsel for Mason General Hospital, Mason County Public 

Utility and Transit District, and the Shelton School District. 

He was a Mason County Superior Court judge pro tem and 

was appointed as arbitrator or mediator in numerous cases. 

He served as a captain in the U.S. Army Judge Advocate 

General Corps from 1973 to 1976, as a prosecutor in Fort 

Bragg, North Carolina, and defense counsel in Fort Lewis, 

Washington. Judge Settle received his B.A. from Claremont 

McKenna College in 1969, and his J.D. from Willamette 

University, College of Law, in 1972. He maintains chambers 

in Tacoma.

Judge Otis D. Wright, II, was 

appointed a district judge for the 

Central District of California 

on April 16, 2007. Prior to his 

appointment to the federal bench, 

Judge Wright served as a Los 

Angeles County Superior Court 

judge, from 2005 to 2007. He was 

a partner at Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker 

LLP from 1983 to 2005. Judge Wright served as a deputy 

attorney general for the California Department of Justice, 

Office of the Attorney General, from 1980 to 1983. He was a 

Los Angeles County sheriff deputy for 11 years. Judge Wright 

received his B.A. from the California State University at Los 

Angeles in 1976, and his J.D. from Southwestern School of 

Law in 1980. He maintains chambers in Los Angeles.
12 Annual Report 2007

District Judges continued

Judge George H. Wu was 

appointed a district judge for the 

Central District of California 

on April 17, 2007. Prior to his 

appointment to the federal bench, 

Judge Wu served as a Los Angeles 

County Superior Court judge, 

from 1996 to 2007, and served 

as a Los Angeles Municipal Court judge, from 1993 to 

1996. He twice served as an assistant U.S. attorney for 

the Central District of California, from 1991 to 1993, 

and from 1982 to 1989, and was an assistant professor of 

law at the University of Tennessee, College of Law, from 

1979 to 1982. Judge Wu received his B.A. from Pomona 

College in 1972, and his J.D. from the University of 

Chicago Law School in 1975. Following law school, he 

clerked for the late Judge Stanley N. Barnes of the U.S. 

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, from 1976 to 

1977 and in 1979. He maintains chambers in Los Angeles.

Bankruptcy Judge

Judge Robert N. Kwan was 

appointed a bankruptcy judge for 

the Central District of California 

on February 5, 2007. Prior to his 

appointment, Judge Kwan served 

as an assistant U.S. attorney for 

the Central District of California 

from 1989 to 2007. He was a trial 

attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Unit, in 

Washington, D.C., from 1983 to 1987; a trial attorney in 

the Civil Unit from 1979 to 1983; and a law clerk in 1979. 

Judge Kwan received his B.A. from Yale College in 1975, 

his J.D. from the University of California, Hastings College 

of the Law, in 1979, and his LL.M. from the Georgetown 

University Law Center in 1985. Judge Kwan maintains 

chambers in Los Angeles.

New Judges
Judicial Transitions 13

Magistrate Judges

Judge Gary S. Austin was appointed 

a magistrate judge for the Eastern 

District of California on October 

12, 2007. Prior to his appointment 

to the federal bench, Judge Austin 

served as a Fresno County Superior 

Court judge, from 1988 to 2007, 

and was a Fresno Municipal Court 

judge, from 1986 to 1988. He served as a deputy district 

attorney, Fresno County, from 1977 to 1986, and was 

promoted to senior deputy district and lead attorney in the 

Career Criminal Unit in 1984. Judge Austin received his 

B.A. from the California State University at Fresno in 1972, 

and his J.D. from San Joaquin College of Law in 1976. 

He maintains chambers in Fresno.

Judge Michelle Hamilton Burns was 

appointed a magistrate judge for the 

District of Arizona on February 23, 

2007. Prior to her appointment, 

Judge Burns was an assistant U.S. 

attorney for the District of Arizona, 

from 2003 to 2007. She was an 

attorney in professional association 

at Carpenter and Hamilton in Phoenix from 1990 to 2002. 

She served as a deputy public defender for Maricopa County 

Public Defender’s Office from 1985 to 1989. Judge Burns 

received her B.A. from the University of Michigan in 1981, 

and her J.D. from the University of Toledo College of Law in 

1985. She maintains chambers in Phoenix.

Judge Mark D. Clarke was 

appointed a magistrate judge for 

the District of Oregon on March 

1, 2007. Prior to his appointment, 

Judge Clarke was a shareholder 

at Frohnmayer Deatherage Pratt 

Jamieson Clarke & Moore in 

Medford, Oregon, from 1990 to 

2007. He was an associate at Bullivant Houser Baily PC, 

in Portland, Oregon, from 1983 to 1990. Judge Clarke 

received his B.S. from Southern Oregon University in 

1980, and his J.D. from the University of Oregon School 

of Law in 1983. He maintains chambers in Medford.

Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg was 

appointed a magistrate judge for 

the Central District of California 

on March 13, 2007. Prior to her 

appointment, Judge Rosenberg 

was a partner at Blecher & Collins 

in Los Angeles practicing complex 

civil litigation in the areas of 

antitrust, intellectual property, communications, and unfair 

competition, primarily in federal court. She taught antitrust 

law and was an adjunct professor at Loyola Law School. 

Judge Rosenberg received her B.A. in 1982 from Wellesley 

College and her J.D. in 1985 from the University of 

California at Los Angeles School of Law, where she served 

as managing editor of the UCLA Law Review. 

She maintains chambers in Los Angeles.

Judge Deborah M. Smith was 

appointed a magistrate judge for 

the District of Alaska on February 

2, 2007. Prior to her appointment, 

she served as first assistant U.S. 

attorney then acting U.S. attorney 

for the District of Alaska from 

2002 to 2006. Judge Smith also 

was chief then deputy chief of the Environmental Crimes 

Section, Department of Justice, in Washington, D.C., from 

1995 to 2002. She was director of the New England Bank 

Fraud Task Force in Boston, from 1993 to 1995; a trial 

attorney then senior litigation counsel, Fraud Section, DOJ, 

Washington, D.C., from 1987 to 1993; an assistant U.S. 

attorney then chief assistant U.S. attorney for the District 

of Alaska from 1982 to 1987; a staff attorney, Alaska Court 

of Appeals, from 1981 to1982; and an assistant public 

defender, Alaska Public Defender Agency, from 1978 to 

1980. Judge Smith received her B.S. from the University 

of Florida at Gainesville in 1974, and her J.D. from 

Northeastern School of Law in 1978. She was an education 

editor for the Fort Lauderdale News and the Sun-Sentinel 

from 1974 to 1975. She maintains chambers in Anchorage.
14 Annual Report 2007

Magistrate Judges continued

Judge Keith Strong was appointed 

a magistrate judge for the District 

of Montana on January 8, 2007. 

Prior to his appointment, Judge 

Strong was a partner at Dorsey and 

Whitney in Missoula, from 1988 

to 2006. He practiced with the law 

firm of Church, Harris, Johnson 

and Williams in Great Falls, Montana, from 1974 to 1988. 

Judge Strong received his B.A. from the University of 

Montana in 1971, and his J.D. from the University of 

Montana School of Law in 1974. He maintains chambers 

in Great Falls.

New Senior Judges

Judge Napoleon A. Jones, Jr., of 

the Southern District of California 

was appointed a district judge on 

September 15, 1994. He assumed 

senior status on September 19, 

2007. Prior to his appointment 

to the federal bench, Judge Jones 

served as a San Diego County 

Superior Court judge, from 1982 to 1994, and as a San 

Diego Municipal Court judge, from 1977 to 1982. He 

engaged in private practice at Jones, Cazares, Adler and 

Lopez, Attorneys at Law, in San Diego from 1975 to 1977. 

Judge Jones was a staff attorney at Defenders, Inc., in San 

Diego from 1972 to 1973; a legal intern at California Rural 

Legal Assistance in Modesto from 1971 to 1972; and a legal 

services coordinator at Community Crisis Center in San 

Diego in 1970. He served in the Army from 1962 to 1965. 

Judge Jones received his B.A. and his M.S.W. from San 

Diego State University in 1962 and in 1967, respectively, 

and his J.D. from the University of San Diego School of 

Law in 1971. He maintains chambers in San Diego.

Judge Stephen M. McNamee of the 

District of Arizona was appointed a 

district judge on June 4, 1990. He 

served as chief judge from 1999 to 

2006, and assumed senior status 

on October 1, 2007. Prior to his 

appointment, Judge McNamee 

served as a U.S. attorney for the 

District of Arizona from 1985 to 1990. He worked as a 

chief assistant U.S. attorney, from 1981 to 1985, and as a 

first assistant U.S. attorney in 1980. He was a lecturer at the 

University of Arizona, College of Business, from 1975 to 

1979; an assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Arizona 

from 1971 to 1979; and an attorney at Florsheim Shoe 

Company’s Legal and Finance Department from 1969 to 

1971. Judge McNamee received his B.A. from the University 

of Cincinnati in 1964, his M.A. from the University of 

Arizona in 1967, and his J.D. from the University of Arizona, 

College of Law, in 1969. He maintains chambers in Phoenix.

New Judges
Judicial Transitions 15

In Memoriam

Judge Polly S. Higdon, 65, a 

bankruptcy judge for the District 

of Oregon, died on October 13, 

2007. She was appointed to the 

court on December 17, 1987, and 

served as chief bankruptcy judge, 

from 1997 to 1999. She maintained 

chambers in Eugene. Judge Higdon 

received her B.A. from Vassar College in 1964, her J.D. 

from Washburn University School of Law in 1975, and her 

LL.M. from New York University School of Law in 1980. 

She was admitted to the Oregon State Bar and Kansas State 

Bar, and was a member of the National Conference of 

Bankruptcy Judges, the American Bankruptcy Institute, 

and the National Association of Bankruptcy Trustees 

(Taxation Committee). Judge Higdon is survived by her 

mother, daughter, and brother.

Judge Michael W. Leavitt, 63, a 

magistrate judge for the Eastern 

District of Washington, died on 

June 17, 2007. He was appointed 

to the court on February 2, 2004, 

and maintained chambers in Yakima. 

Judge Leavitt was a member of 

the Ninth Circuit’s Magistrate 

Judges Education Committee. Prior to his appointment to 

the federal bench, he served as a Yakima County Superior 

Court judge, from 1989 to 2004. He was a partner and 

shareholder in the former Gavin Robinson Law Firm in 

Yakima from 1973 to 1988. Born in Hawthorne, Nevada, 

and raised in Homedale, Idaho, Judge Leavitt received his 

B.A. from Brigham Young University in 1968, and his J.D. 

from the University of Utah, School of Law, in 1971. Judge 

Leavitt is survived by his wife, Alona, five children, five 

brothers and sisters, his father 

and stepmother.

Judge Alan A. McDonald, 79, 

a district judge for the Eastern 

District of Washington, died on July 

26, 2007. He was appointed to the 

court on October 17, 1985. He 

assumed senior status on December 

13, 1996, and maintained chambers 

in Yakima. Prior to his appointment 

to the bench, Judge McDonald engaged in private 

practice with the law firm of Halverson & Applegate in 

Yakima for 31 years. He began his legal career as a deputy 

prosecuting attorney, Yakima County, from 1952 to 1954. 

Judge McDonald received his B.S. from the University of 

Washington in 1950, and his LL.B. from the University of 

Washington, School of Law, in 1952. While in law school, 

he was a member of the editorial board of the Law Review 

and was awarded a Carkeek Scholarship. Judge McDonald 

is survived by his wife, Ruby, three daughters, three 

grandchildren, and a brother.

Judge Carl A. Muecke, 89, a district 

judge for the District of Arizona, 

died on September 21, 2007. He 

was appointed to the court on 

October 1, 1964, and served as 

chief judge from 1979 to 1984. 

Judge Muecke assumed senior 

status on November 30, 1984, and 

maintained chambers in Phoenix. Prior to his appointment, 

Judge Muecke served as a U.S. attorney for the District of 

Arizona from 1961 to 1964. He engaged in private practice 

in Phoenix from 1953 to 1961. Judge Muecke served as a 

major in the Marine Corps Reserve from 1946 to 1950, 

and as a major in the Marine Corps from 1942 to 1946. He 

received his B.A. from the College of William and Mary 

in 1941, and his LL.B. from the University of Arizona, 

College of Law, in 1953. Judge Muecke is survived by his 

wife, Vicki, two sons, a daughter, and four grandchildren.
16 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

Judge John S. Rhoades, Sr., 82, 

a district judge for the Southern 

District of California, died on 

September 3, 2007. He was 

appointed to the court on October 

28, 1985. He assumed senior 

status on November 4, 1995, and 

maintained chambers in San Diego. 

Prior to his appointment, Judge Rhoades was a senior 

partner in the Rhoades, Hollywood, and Neil law firm 

from 1960 to 1985, and was a sole practitioner from 1956 

to 1960. He was a deputy city attorney and prosecuting 

attorney in San Diego, from 1956 to 1957, and from 1955 

to 1956, respectively. Judge Rhoades received his A.B. 

from Stanford University in 1948, and his J.D. from the 

University of California, Hastings College of the Law, in 

1951. He served in the Navy from 1943 to 1946 and in the 

Naval Reserve until 1966. He is survived by his five sons.

Judge Joseph E. Schmitt, 84, was 

appointed a magistrate judge for 

the Southern District of California 

on October 3, 1975. He remained 

on recall status for the district 

until the time of his death. Prior 

to his appointment, Judge Schmitt 

served as city attorney in Brawney, 

California, from 1961 to 1991. He worked for the District 

Attorney’s Office in El Centro and was a special advisor to 

the county board of supervisors. Judge Schmitt received his 

B.S. from Indiana University in 1948, and his law degree, 

along with classmates Sandra Day O’Connor and William 

Rehnquist, from Stanford University in 1951. Judge 

Schmitt served in the Army during the Korean War, and 

following law school, he served as a captain in the Army 

Judge Advocate General Corps from 1951 to 1953. He is 

survived by his wife, Jean.

in MeMoriaM continued
ninTh circuiT highlighTs
18 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

ninth circuit initiatives

circuiT case BudgeTing ProJecT

Legal defense of indigent defendants charged with major 

crimes in federal courts can be very expensive. The 

Ninth Circuit is one of three federal circuits engaged in 

efforts to control these costs without compromising legal 

representation. Their goal is to develop case management 

and budgeting tools for judges and for defense counsel 

appointed under the Criminal Justice Act, the federal law 

requiring indigent defense.

Working through its Committee on Defender Services, 

the Judicial Conference of the United States, national 

governing body of the federal courts, selected the Second, 

Sixth and Ninth circuits for the pilot project. The Ninth 

Circuit, through its Office of the Circuit Executive, 

provided staff, hiring a veteran CJA attorney, Nancy 

Rutledge, to carry forward the effort. Ms. Rutledge, 

who came onboard in January 2007, is a former CJA 

supervising attorney for the U.S. District Court in 

Colorado.

“It is a matter of managing the money spent for the 

defense of CJA defendants more effectively and efficiently. 

It will never be about compromising the representation of 

a defendant,” Ms. Rutledge observed.

Containment of CJA costs focuses on capital cases and 

so called “mega” cases where defense costs for a single 

defendant can exceed $30,000.

The pilot project has multiple goals. The first is to 

help judges develop and manage case budgets using 

the spreadsheet software program, Microsoft Excel. 

A customized Excel spreadsheet was developed, along 

with supporting documents and training manuals. The 

Excel-based budgeting system is now being used by all 

three circuits. Improvements to the system are ongoing. 

Contributing significantly to the development of this tool 

was Sandy Andrews, a policy and research analyst with the 

Circuit Executive’s Office.

In addition to their work with judges, court staff and CJA 

attorneys in the federal trial courts, circuit staff also is 

working with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, assisting 

a committee of circuit judges responsible for reviewing 

CJA excess payments. The committee is developing an 

attorney billing program that also uses Excel for reporting 

and calculating hours and expenses. It is anticipated that the 

new billing system will be implemented in 2008 by many 

district courts, making possible faster audits and reviews, 

uniformity in court billing practices, and more timely 

payment to CJA attorneys.

The pilot project also seeks to:

• Develop compensation standards, including maximum 

rates for investigators, experts, and other service providers. 

• Maintain a statistical database, which can be used to 

measure the effects of case budgeting, answer questions 

from judges and others, and manage the Criminal Justice 

The Ninth Circuit hosted a training and planning 

session for the Circuit Case Budgeting Project 

in June. Attendees included, from left front row, 

Paul E. Denicoff of the AO’s Office of Defender 

Services; Nancy Rutledge of the Ninth Circuit OCE; 

Christopher Davis, mega-case budgeting consultant; 

from left second row, Bob Ranz and Timothy D. 

Schroeder of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals; and 

Jerry L. Tritz of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
ninth CiRCuit highlights 19

Pacific islands commiTTee

Through the work of its Pacific Islands Committee, 

the Ninth Circuit has helped to promote the rule of 

law far beyond the nation’s borders.

The committee was established in 1991 by the Judicial 

Council of the Ninth Circuit to carry on oversight 

responsibilities related to the judiciaries of current 

and former U.S. territories in the Pacific. These 

responsibilities were delegated to the circuit by the 

Judicial Conference of the United States, the national 

governing body for federal courts. 

The territories in question are Guam and American 

Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands, the republics of Palau and the Marshall 

Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia. All 

but American Samoa are in the North Pacific. (Guam 

and the Northern Mariana Islands are part of the 

Ninth Circuit and have their own federal courts.)

The committee is responsible for developing and 

providing continuing educational and training 

opportunities for judges and court professionals, and 

for the overall improvement of the administration 

of justice in the courts of these island nations. Since 

establishing the Pacific Islands Judicial Education Program in 

2002, the committee has approved 44 educational and training 

conferences, seminars and workshops.

During fiscal year 2007, the committee approved 17 events, 

which served more than 150 chief justices, judges, probation 

officers, public defenders, attorneys, clerks and court 

administrators. The programs focused on trial practices and 

procedures, court administrator training, interaction between 

judges and journalists, domestic violence and other topics.

Since... 2002, the committee 

has approved 44 educational and 

training conferences, seminars 

and workshops.

Act program. The database will provide information 

about the range and average costs of more common 

case types in the district courts.

• Plan, create and implement training programs 

and materials, including the Ninth Circuit Criminal 

Justice Act Summit scheduled to take place in January 

2008.

• Solicit assistance from experienced judges and other 

judiciary personnel in developing policy guidance for 

the review of cases. Model motions and orders will be made 

available to district courts and CJA attorneys throughout the 

Ninth Circuit.

The multi-circuit pilot project presents an excellent 

opportunity for federal courts throughout the nation to 

address inconsistencies in the CJA payment process, adopt 

uniform standards for appointment and payment of CJA 

counsel, and increase the overall quality of representation in 

the targeted cases.

Retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor 

attended the FJC’s Mid-Winter Workshop held January 

29-31 in Santa Barbara, California. Justice O’Connor is 

shown here with, from left, Chief District Judge Frances 

Marie Tydingco-Gatewood of the District of Guam, Justice F. 

Philip Cabullido of the Supreme Court of Guam, and Chief 

Justice Aliksa B. Aliksa of Kosrae State Supreme Court.

continued
20 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

ninth circuit initiatives continued

The Domestic Violence Conference, held in August in 

Hagatna, Guam, was a groundbreaking effort focusing on 

the role of judges and the courts in dealing with domestic 

violence. The two-day event featured lectures and 

exercises to help judges be prepared to take a leadership 

role in their community’s response to domestic violence.

Funding for these programs comes through multiple 

grants from the U.S. Department of the Interior. For fiscal 

year 2007, funds received from the DOI totaled $320,000 

for programs in American Samoa, NMI, Guam and Palau, 

and $316,000 for programs benefiting the Federated 

States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall 

Islands.

The grants also funded participation by island judges and 

court staff in regional judicial gatherings such as the Pacific 

Judicial Council Leadership Training Conference, held in 

February in Kosrae, Micronesia, which was attended by 

15 chief justices and presiding judges representing all six 

jurisdictions. Judges and court staff also were brought to the 

United States to participate in the Federal Judicial Center’s 

Mid-Winter Workshop in Santa Barbara, California, and to 

attend classes at the National Judicial College in Reno.

In fiscal year 2007, the Pacific Islands Committee was 

chaired by Senior District Judge Consuelo B. Marshall 

of the Central District of California. Other members 

included Circuit Judges Richard R. Clifton of Honolulu 

and M. Margaret McKeown of San Diego; Senior Circuit 

Judge J. Clifford Wallace, also of San Diego; Chief District 

Judges Alex R. Munson of the Northern Mariana Islands 

and Frances Marie Tydingco-Gatewood of Guam; and 

District Judge J. Michael Seabright of Honolulu.

The committee roster also included as ex officio members 

Circuit Judge Mary M. Schroeder of Phoenix, former 

chief judge of the circuit, and, Senior District Judge 

Howard D. McKibben of Reno and Idaho Supreme Court 

Justice Linda Copple-Trout, who represent the judiciary’s 

national Committee on Federal-State Jurisdiction.

PuBlic informaTion and communiTy

ouTreach commiTTee

Judges, Journalists Gather for Ninth Circuit 

Media Conference

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 

welcomed dozens of journalists, media lawyers 

and academics to the Richard H. Chambers U.S. 

Courthouse in Pasadena in September for a two-day 

media conference.

The educational program included segments on 

secrecy, judicial ethics, cameras in the courtroom and 

the proliferation and growing influence of bloggers in 

legal news coverage, plus a review of Supreme Court 

rulings on Ninth Circuit cases and a rare opportunity 

for the press to hear remarks from a panel of current, 

former and incoming chief judges of the circuit.

The event was organized by the Ninth Circuit 

Public Information and Community Outreach 

(PICO) Committee, whose mission is to promote 

public understanding of and confidence in the 

judiciary. The committee has organized similar 

media programs for a number of the federal district 

courts in the circuit.

The September 5-6 conference in Pasadena drew 

journalists from Seattle, San Francisco, San Diego 

and the Los Angeles metropolitan area. A number of 

media attorneys, mostly from Southern California, 

also attended.

Media panelists included Fred Graham, anchor 

of CourtTV; Dahlia Lithwick, editor and legal 

correspondent for the online magazine, Slate; 

Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters 

Committee for Freedom of the Press; Howard Mintz, 

legal affairs writer for the San Jose Mercury News; 

Tony Mauro, Supreme Court correspondent for 

Legal Times; Henry Weinstein, legal affairs writer 

for the Los Angeles Times; Martin Berg, editor of 

the Los Angeles and San Francisco legal publication, 

The Daily Journal; Pam MacLean, California bureau 

chief for the National Law Journal; David Postman, 
ninth CiRCuit highlights 21

Pictured right is the Ninth 

Circuit—Past, Present, 

Future panel, from left to 

right, Senior Circuit Judge 

Procter Hug, Jr., Chief Judge 

Mary M. Schroeder, Circuit 

Judge Alex Kozinski, and 

Senior Circuit Judge J. Clifford 

Wallace. Pictured below is 

Chief District Judge Robert 

S. Lasnik receiving an award 

from District Judge Marilyn 

L. Huff in recognition of his outstanding leadership while 

serving as chair of the Public Information and Community 

Outreach (PICO) committee from October 2004 to 

September 2007.

chief political writer of the Seattle Times; and Eugene Volokh, 

UCLA law professor and sponsor of the online legal blog, The 

Volokh Conspiracy.

A number of judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 

participated. The panel of chief judges included Chief Judge 

Mary M. Schroeder, who has served since December 2000; 

Judge Alex Kozinski, the incoming chief scheduled to assume 

the gavel in December 2007; and two past chiefs, Senior 

Circuit Judge Procter Hug, Jr., who served from 1996 to 

2000, and Senior Circuit Judge J. Clifford Wallace, who 

served from 1991 to 1996.

Also participating from the bench were Ninth Circuit 

Judges Kim M. Wardlaw, Raymond C. Fisher, Susan P. 

Graber, M. Margaret McKeown, Jay S. Bybee, Sidney 

R. Thomas, Richard R. Clifton and Carlos T. Bea; and 

Chief District Judge Robert S. Lasnik of the Western 

District of Washington, and District Judge Wiley 

Daniel of the District of Colorado.

Other participants included Nevada Federal Defender 

Franny Forsman; Debra Yang, a former U.S. Attorney 

in Los Angeles; media attorneys Kelli Sager and 

Guylyn Cummins; attorney Kathleen Sullivan, former 

dean of the Stanford Law School; Vikram Amar, a 

law professor at the University of California at Davis 

School of Law; and Gary Hengstler, director of the 

National Center for Courts and the Media.

Since 2002, the PICO Committee has helped 

organize media workshops around the Ninth Circuit. 

The committee also seeks to promote community 

outreach efforts undertaken by the federal district and 

bankruptcy courts, such as Law Day and the Open 

Doors to Federal Courts programs. Through the Office 

of the Circuit Executive, the committee distributes 

“Children at Risk,” a video-based educational program 

that teaches younger students about the basics of the 

court system, and has strongly endorsed the Credit 

Abuse Resistance and Education (CARE) program, 

which helps educate high school seniors about the 

problems associated with credit card debt.
22 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

ninth circuit MaKes Judicial history

with first panel of hispanic Judges

Pictured above (left to right): Senior Circuit Judges Arthur l. Alarcón, 

Circuit Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw and Senior Circuit Judge 

Ferdinand F. Fernandez.

The United States Court of 

Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 

made judicial history when 

an appellate panel consisting of three 

judges of Hispanic descent heard oral 

arguments in Seattle on July 11, 2007. 

It was the first time that an all-Hispanic 

panel sat in any of the nation’s federal 

courts of appeal since they were 

established in 1891.

Circuit Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw and 

Senior Circuit Judges Arthur L. Alarcón 

and Ferdinand F. Fernandez comprised 

the panel, which considered appeals of 

decisions reached in the federal trial 

courts of Washington and Idaho. They are 

among six Hispanic judges on the Ninth 

Circuit Court of Appeals, the most of 

any circuit court in the country.

“When you think of the immigration 

this country has had from all quarters 

and our melting pot history, I would 

have thought this would have happened 

more than once by now,” observed Judge 

Wardlaw, who was appointed to the 

court in 1998 by President Clinton.

“It’s very important for our courts to 

reflect the diversity and multiculturalism 

of our society,” she added. “It gives us 

credibility when people are being judged 

by people who may have had similar 

experiences or at least can comprehend 

their experiences.”

For Judge Alárcon, appointed in 1979 

by President Carter and currently the 

longest-serving Hispanic circuit judge in 

the country, an all-Hispanic panel may be 

overdue, but gratifying nonetheless.

“I would hope that it will encourage Hispanic kids that they can go after their 

dreams and achieve. There has never been a Hispanic on the Supreme Court and I 

think that’s something that will be available very soon,” Judge Alárcon said.

Also of Hispanic descent are Ninth Circuit Judges Richard A. Paez, 

appointed in 2000 by President Clinton, and Consuelo M. Callahan and 

Carlos T. Bea, appointed in 2003 and 2005, respectively, by President Bush.

Appellate panels are drawn randomly and there has been the possibility of 

an all-Hispanic panel in the Ninth Circuit since 1998. The U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has had at least three judges of Hispanic descent 

since 1994, but has not drawn an all-Hispanic panel yet.

All told, there are currently 14 judges of Hispanic descent currently serving 

on the 11 regional courts of appeal, according to the Federal Judicial Center, 

which maintains a database on the gender and ethnicity of federal judges. The 

Second Circuit has two Hispanic judges and the First, Third and 10th circuits 

each have one.
ninth CiRCuit highlights 23

of improving the administration of justice within such 

circuit.” Most of the judges who preside and lawyers 

who practice in the federal courts of the western 

United States participate.

Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder 

introduced Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle who 

welcomed attendees at the opening session. Chief 

Judge Schroeder delivered her final state of the circuit 

address, highlighting initiatives undertaken, goals 

achieved and challenges that lie ahead for the federal 

courts of the western United States.

Educational Programs

The conference general sessions included various 

educational programs that focused on drug abuse policy, 

secrecy and privacy in the electronic age, confidentiality 

in the courts, and the role of the courts in wartime. 

The session “Reexamining Drug Abuse Policy: Theory, 

Science and Practice” discussed whether the increase 

in the number of persons sentenced for federal drug 

offenses represent progress, defeat, or the expected 

results of the use of the criminal justice system to 

prevent drug abuse. Panelists included District Judge 

Reggie Walton of the District of Columbia and Scott 

Burns, deputy director for state and local affairs in the 

White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. 

In the “Secrecy in the Electronic Age” segment, 

experts examined how the courts had to balance the 

presumptive constitutional rights of the public and 

press to attend court proceedings and inspect court 

records against other important public concerns, such 

as litigants’ rights to financial and personal privacy, 

companies’ rights to protect trade secrets and other 

proprietary information, and the rights of jurors and 

other involuntary players in the judicial system. 

Panelists for this session included Senior District 

Judge Terry J. Hatter, Jr., of the Central District of 

California; Bankruptcy Court Clerk Barry K. Lander 

of the Southern District of California; Lucy Dalglish, 

executive director of the Reporters Committee for 

Freedom of the Press; and attorney Debra W. Yang 

The 2007 Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference was held 

July 16-19 at the Sheraton Waikiki in Honolulu, 

Hawaii. The theme of the conference was “Collision 

Course: When Liberty and Order Clash.” More than 800 

judges, judiciary employees, representatives of government 

agencies and private attorneys participated in the conference. 

The annual event is held pursuant to Section 333 of 

Title 28 of the United States Code for “the purpose of 

considering the business of the courts and advising means 

ninth circuit Judicial conference

Pictured above: Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle 

welcoming conference attendees. Pictured below: 

Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder (right) and Chief 

District Judge Robert S. Lasnik (left), Chair, Ninth 

Circuit Conference Executive Committee.
24 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

of Los Angeles. Professor David C. Kohler 

of Southwestern University School of Law 

moderated the session.

“Breakfast with the Bench — Confidentiality 

in the Courts,” which involves members of the 

bench and bar, further discussed secrecy in the 

electronic age and examined how the definition 

of confidentiality in the courts had changed as 

a result of the Internet. Attorney Andrew P. 

Gordon of Las Vegas made the panel introduction, 

and District Judge William Alsup of the Northern 

District of California and Lucy Dalglish 

moderated the panel.

The historic role played by the courts in times of 

crises was the focus of the segment “The Role of 

the Courts in Wartime: A Historical Perspective.” 

Panelists included Professor John O. McGinnis 

of Northwestern University School of Law; 

Professor Harry N. Scheiber of the University 

of California, Boalt Hall School of Law; and 

Professor Geoffrey R. Stone of the University of 

Chicago Law School. Dean Elizabeth Rindskopf 

Parker of the University of the Pacific, McGeorge 

School of Law, moderated the session. 

Conversation with the Justice

The highlight of the conference was the participation of Associate 

Justice John Paul Stevens of the United States Supreme Court. 

Justice Stevens, who last attended the conference in 2002, was 

warmly welcomed by attendees.

Chief District Judge Robert S. Lasnik of Seattle, chair of the 

Conference Executive Committee, Andrew P. Gordon of Las 

Vegas, chair of the Lawyer Representatives Coordinating 

Committee, and attorney Laura S. Taylor of San Diego, presented 

questions to Justice Stevens. The conversation segment was wellreceived by the attendees. Some gathered next to the justice and 

took photographs as their remembrance of the conference.

Appointed in 1975, Supreme Court Justice John 

Paul Stevens is the longest-serving justice on the 

nation’s highest court. 

The 2007 Ninth Circuit Judicial 

Conference employed the 

use of an Audience Response 

System which enabled the 

audience to participate in one 

of the panel presentations by 

submitting their answers to 

interactive questions posed by 

the panel. 

The panel on “Reexamining 

Drug Abuse Policy: Theory, 

Science and Practice,” showed 

filmed scenarios to the audience 

about individuals abusing or 

selling drugs. The audience 

was asked to respond to the 

solutions suggested by the 

panel members. Using a keypad 

device, the audience had the 

opportunity to submit their 

responses and to see the results 

in real time.

Pictured above is Circuit 

Judge Consuelo M. Callahan 

of Sacramento inputting 

her response on the filmed 

scenarios.

audience response systeM

used at conference
ninth CiRCuit highlights 25

The Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference provides an 

opportunity to recognize outstanding service to 

the legal profession and judicial system. Awards 

established by the Ninth Circuit Judicial Council, the 

Administrative Office of the United States Courts, and the 

prestigious American Inns of Court are presented during 

the opening session of the conference. The following 

recipients were announced for 2007.

Ninth Circuit Professionalism Award

Sacramento media attorney Charity Kenyon received 

the 2007 American Inns of Court Ninth Circuit 

Professionalism Award, which recognizes “a senior 

practicing lawyer or judge whose life and practice display 

sterling character and unquestioned integrity, coupled with 

ongoing dedication to the highest standards of the legal 

profession and the rule of law.”

Ms. Kenyon is nationally known for her expertise in First 

Amendment law and regarded by members of the bench 

and bar as a model of professionalism, ethics and civility. 

Over the course of her 30-year career in the law, she has 

emphasized appellate practice, news media representation, 

and public contracts disputes. 

Ms. Kenyon is a founding member of Sacramento’s Milton 

L. Schwartz American Inn of Court and served on its 

executive committee for four years. Nominated for her 

exceptional mentoring aptitude and warm friendship 

toward newer lawyers, she was also acknowledged for her 

creative and stimulating programs, many of which have 

been models for Inns of Courts throughout the country.

The American Inns of Court, a national organization 

with 340 inns and 75,000 active and alumni members, 

is dedicated to excellence, civility, professionalism, and 

ethics in the practice of law. An American Inn of Court 

is an amalgam of judges, lawyers, and in some cases, law 

professors and law students. The inns are intended to 

improve the skills, professionalism and ethics of the 

bench and bar.

conference award presentations

TOP (from left to right): Albert F. Pagni, Advisory Board member 

(NV), Fredric C. Tausend, John P. Frank Award recipient; and J. 

Richard Creatura, Advisory Board member (WAW). 

MIDDLE (from left to right): Charity Kenyon, American Inns of 

Court Ninth Circuit Professionalism Award recipient; and Chief 

Justice Ronald T.Y. Moon of the Supreme Court of Hawaii. 

BOTTOM (from left to right): Susan M. Doherty, Robert F. 

Peckham Award recipient; and Senior Circuit Judge Dorothy W. 

Nelson of Pasadena, Chair, ADR Committee.

continued
26 Annual Report 2007

Alternative Dispute Resolution Awards

Attorney Susan M. Doherty, Alternative Dispute 

Resolution program coordinator for the U.S. Bankruptcy 

Court for the Central District of California, received 

the 2007 Robert F. Peckham Award for Excellence in 

Alternative Dispute Resolution. The Peckham award 

recognizes judicial employees who have significantly 

advanced the delivery of effective court-based ADR 

programs in the circuit.

Ms. Doherty helped start the court’s Bankruptcy 

Mediation Program Panel in 1994 after being hired as 

a career law clerk by Bankruptcy Judge Barry Russell. 

The program serves Los Angeles and six adjoining 

counties. More than 150 certified attorneys, many of 

them bilingual, help litigants resolve their disputes more 

promptly, at less cost, and without the stress and pressure 

of litigation. After taking a leave of absence in 1999, Ms. 

Doherty returned to the court in 2004 and resumed her 

positions with Judge Russell and the mediation program.

The University of California Hastings College of the Law 

received the 2007 Ninth Circuit ADR Education Award 

which recognizes law schools that have significantly 

advanced ADR scholarship and research.

Hastings Center for Negotiation and Dispute Resolution, 

established in 2003, is one of the largest ADR education 

programs in the country which provides elective 

course selections for more than 450 students each 

year. The center includes a mediation clinic in which 

students participate in an intensive academic seminar on 

mediation, then serve as mediators in small claims court 

and for the City and County of San Francisco’s Equal 

Employment Opportunity division.

John P. Frank Award

Fredric C. Tausend of Seattle, an elite trial attorney, former 

law school dean and early advocate of diversity in the legal 

profession, received the 2007 John P. Frank Award, which 

recognizes a lawyer who has “demonstrated outstanding 

character and integrity; dedication to the rule of law; 

proficiency as a trial and appellate lawyer; success in 

promoting collegiality among members of the bench and 

bar; and a lifetime of service to the federal courts of the 

Ninth Circuit.”

Mr. Tausend’s legal career spans 50 years. Since 1990, he has 

been a senior counsel at Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston 

Gates Ellis in Seattle. Prior to joining that firm, he was a 

partner at the Seattle firm of Schweppe, Krug & Tausend, 

where he made his mark as top anti-trust lawyer and was 

involved in precedent-setting anti-trust cases in federal and 

state courts around the country.

From 1980 to 1986, Mr. Tausend served as dean of the 

University of Puget Sound Law School (now Seattle 

University Law School), which flourished under his 

leadership. He served as an adjunct professor of law at 

the school, teaching courses in anti-trust, trademark and 

copyright, and legal ethics. He also taught at the University 

of Washington Law School as a Shefelman Distinguished 

Lecturer from 1991 to 1992, and in 1995.

In nominating him for the award, colleagues noted that 

Mr. Tausend recognized the need for diversity long before 

the rest of the legal profession and advocated quietly on 

behalf of women and people of color. He made significant 

contributions as a mentor and friend to generations of young 

lawyers, and to pro bono and bar activities, including his 

work as a former lawyer representative to the Ninth Circuit.
ninth CiRCuit highlights 27

2

007 closed with a changing of the guard at the 

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 

Circuit. Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder of 

Phoenix, the first woman to lead the Ninth Circuit, 

stepped down after seven eventful years. She was 

succeeded by new Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of 

Pasadena.

A symbolic gavel passing ceremony held November 

30 at the James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse in San 

Francisco marked the changeover. Dozens of federal 

judges, prominent members of the bar and elected 

leaders attended the event.

In his first remarks as executive officer of the nation’s 

largest and busiest appellate court, Judge Kozinski 

sought to share the spotlight with his predecessors and 

with the many people who work behind the scenes in 

the federal courts of the West.

“We can only do our jobs as judges due to the support 

we have from our staff. We are really nothing without 

these people, the men and women, who serve us,” he 

said of law clerks, secretaries and judicial assistants, 

staff in the circuit and district courts, and probation and 

pretrial services officers.

 “The reason (the judiciary) is such a great institution 

is because those folks who work with us show a 

commitment to the job and a commitment to the 

institution that is truly remarkable.”

Noting that he has served as either a judge or law 

clerk under six of the nine previous chief judges of 

the circuit, Judge Kozinski praised their individual 

talents, temperaments and commitment to the 

courts of the circuit.

2007 sees elevation of new

chief Judge for ninth circuit

“As have all of my predecessors, who have risen to the 

occasion with the help of incredibly talented and helpful 

colleagues, both on the court of appeals and in the district 

courts, I hope also to rise to the occasion and manage to 

lead this court through the years ahead.”

Chief judges of the 15 federal trial courts in the circuit 

will be looking to the new chief circuit judge for help and 

leadership, said Chief District Judge Donald W. Molloy of 

the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana.

“There are many, many events and issues that we 

are going to need your help, your guidance and 

your direction. All of us are looking forward to that 

happening,” Judge Molloy said.

Judge Kozinski is the 10th chief judge of the circuit since 

Congress created the position in 1948. As chief judge, he 

will serve as executive officer of both the Ninth Circuit 

Court of Appeals and the Judicial Council of the Ninth 

Circuit, the governing body for federal courts in the 

West. He also will represent the Ninth Circuit at biannual 

meetings of the Judicial Conference of the United States, 

the judiciary’s national policy-making body. The chief judge 

also presides over the 11-judge en banc courts convened 

Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder passes the gavel to incoming 

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski.

We can only do our jobs as 

judges due to the support 

we have from our staff. 
28 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

by the court of appeals to resolve intra-circuit 

legal conflicts or other matters of exceptional 

importance.

Judge Kozinski has served 22 years on the 

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Nominated 

by President Reagan, he received his judicial 

commission on November 7, 1985. Prior to 

his appointment to the appellate bench, Judge 

Kozinski served as chief judge of the United 

States Court of Federal Claims from 1982 to 

1985. 

Judge Kozinski received his A.B. degree in 1972 

from the University of California at Los Angeles, 

and his J.D. in 1975 from the UCLA Law School. 

He served as a law clerk to then-Ninth Circuit 

Judge Anthony M. Kennedy, 1975-76, and to the 

late Chief Justice Warren E. Burger of the U.S. 

Supreme Court, 1976-77.

Judge Schroeder, who has served on the court 

since 1979, was elevated to chief judge in 

December 2000. Under her leadership, the court 

successfully warded off attempts to split the 

circuit and developed innovative new methods to 

weather a 600-percent increase in immigration 

appeals. Judge Schroeder also undertook 

important initiatives addressing jury reform in 

federal district courts, health and wellness for 

all judges, media relations and other matters. 

Several of these initiatives have been adopted by 

the judiciary nationally.

The chief judge of the circuit assumes the 

position based on seniority. The chief judge is the 

judge in regular active service who is senior in 

commission of those judges who are (1) 64 years 

of age or under; (2) have served for one year or 

more as a circuit judge; and (3) have not served 

previously as chief judge. The term of office is 

seven years, or until the incumbent turns 70, 

whichever comes first. The process is authorized 

by 28 U.S.C. §45. 

new circuit executive,

chief circuit Mediator naMed

2007 also saw noteworthy changes in court administration in 

the Ninth Circuit.

Cathy A. Catterson, the longtime clerk of court for the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, was named to 

head the Office of the Circuit Executive, the administrative 

arm of the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit, which governs 

federal courts in the western states. The appointment was 

announced in December by new Chief Judge Alex Kozinski.

Ms. Catterson was given a new title, Circuit and Court 

of Appeals Executive, in recognition of her additional 

responsibilities. Molly Dwyer, chief deputy clerk under 

Ms. Catterson, was named acting clerk of court.

Ms. Catterson had served as clerk of court since 1985, 

managing a staff of more than 200 employees working in the 

circuit’s headquarters in San Francisco and divisional offices 

in Pasadena, Portland and Seattle. She was originally hired 

in 1979 as a senior case expeditor and also worked as chief 

deputy clerk.

Cathy A. Catterson, the new Circuit and Court of Appeals 

Executive has been with the courts for 28 years.
ninth CiRCuit highlights 29

The Office of the Circuit Executive, which is located in San Francisco, 

assists the Judicial Council in achieving its goals and objectives by providing 

varied professional services. The office, which currently has a staff of 34, 

works closely with judges, clerks and other staff in the federal district and 

bankruptcy courts of the circuit.

The position of circuit executive had been vacant since June 1, when Dr. 

Gregory B. Walters, who had held the job for 18 years, resigned to take a 

position in Washington, D.C., as special assistant to James C. Duff, chief 

executive of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.

A native of Queens, New York, Ms. Catterson received her undergraduate 

degree in 1974 from Catholic University of America, and her J.D. in 1978 

from George Mason University Law School. She served as a law clerk to 

the late U.S. District Judge Edward J. Devitt of St. Paul, Minnesota, and is 

admitted to practice before the U.S. Courts of Appeal for the Fourth and 

Ninth circuits, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, 

and the Supreme Court of Virginia.

The court of appeals’ highly successful mediation unit also turned the 

page in 2007 with the appointment of Claudia L. Bernard as the new chief 

circuit mediator. Her appointment, effective May 1, was announced by 

Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder. She succeeded David E. Lombardi, Jr., 

who retired after leading the mediation 

unit since the early 1990s.

Ms. Bernard has been a circuit mediator 

with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 

since 1989. In addition to mediating scores 

of civil and administrative cases per year, 

she has helped train new mediators and 

conducted training in communications for 

employees of various court units.

As chief circuit mediator, Ms. Bernard will 

supervise eight circuit mediators who all 

work exclusively for the court of appeals. 

They collectively resolve about 1,200 cases 

annually, removing them from the court’s 

docket. All of the mediators are licensed 

attorneys, experienced and highly skilled 

in appellate mediation.

Prior to joining the Ninth Circuit staff, 

Ms. Bernard worked as an attorney with 

the law firm of Lieff, Cabraser & Heimann 

in San Francisco, and was a law clerk for 

Magistrate Judge Wayne D. Brazil of the 

U.S. District Court for the Northern 

District of California. She began her 

professional career as an educator and 

paralegal working with various legal 

services foundations and a San Francisco 

law firm, Lillick, McHose & Charles.

Ms. Bernard received her undergraduate 

degree in criminology from the 

University of California at Berkeley, 

graduating Phi Beta Kappa with highest 

honors. She received her J.D. from the 

University of California Hastings College 

of the Law, where she was an associate 

editor of the school’s Communications 

Law Review. She also has wide range 

of post-graduate training in mediationrelated subjects.

Senior Circuit Judge Dorothy W. Nelson and new Chief Circuit Mediator 

Claudia L. Bernard at a reception held at the James R. Browning U.S. 

Courthouse in San Francisco.
30 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

ninth circuit banKruptcy appellate

panel Merit decisions pass 5,000 MarK

The number of appeals decided on the merits by the 

United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the 

Ninth Circuit (BAP) exceeded 5,000 cases in April. 

Of these appeals, 1,439, nearly 30 percent, were decided 

in published opinions with the remaining 3,572 decided in 

unpublished memorandum decisions. The decisions reflect 

the work of 82 different bankruptcy judges who serve on 

BAP since its inception in 1979.

Commenting on the milestone, BAP Chief Judge Philip 

H. Brandt of Western Washington noted, “The BAP has 

been instrumental in developing a uniform body of 

bankruptcy case law within this circuit. BAP decisions 

are cited in courts throughout the United States as 

persuasive authority on bankruptcy issues.” 

Judge Brandt added that the 5,000-plus merits decisions 

do not include procedural dispositions, such as 

dismissals for lack of jurisdiction or lack of prosecution. 

“All told, the BAP has disposed of more than 15,000 

bankruptcy appeals, which has enabled the court of 

appeals and district courts to focus more of their 

attention on their heavy civil and criminal caseloads,” he 

said.

BAP Clerk of Court Harold Marenus noted that federal 

law allows litigants to have their bankruptcy appeals 

heard either by the BAP or a district court. 

“The BAP is a court of choice,” Mr. Marenus said. “Our 

staff is keenly aware that litigants have a choice as to 

where they take their bankruptcy appeals. This keeps us 

highly motivated to provide the best service possible.”

The BAP, which has offices in the Richard H. Chambers 

U.S. Courthouse in Pasadena, was established by the 

Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit as an alternative 

forum for hearing bankruptcy appeals. The BAP consists of 

six members, all sitting bankruptcy judges from districts 

within the circuit. Panel membership is voluntary, and 

appointments are for seven-year terms. Twenty-five 

bankruptcy judges have served on the BAP as members. 

Another 57 bankruptcy judges have served on the BAP as 

pro tem judges, whose assignments typically cover a single 

panel sitting consisting of three to six appeals.

The Ninth Circuit was the first federal circuit to establish 

a bankruptcy appellate panel. Other circuits with 

bankruptcy appellate panels include the First, Sixth, Eighth 

and Tenth circuits. 

The Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate 

Panel consists of, seated from left, 

Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali of the 

Northern District of California, Chief 

Bankruptcy Judge Christopher M. Klein 

of the Eastern District of California, 

Bankruptcy Judge Jim D. Pappas of the 

District of Idaho; and, standing from 

left, Bankruptcy Judge Bruce A. Markell 

District of Nevada, Bankruptcy Judge 

Meredith A. Jury of the Central District of 

California, and Bankruptcy Judge Randall 

L. Dunn of the District of Oregon.

...BAP decisions are cited in courts throughout the United States as 

persuasive authority on bankruptcy issues.
ninth CiRCuit highlights 31

Like many federal courts, the U.S. District Court for the Central 

District of California honors its past chief district judges. At 

its main courthouse in downtown Los Angeles, the ceremonial 

courtroom is adorned with the portraits of those who have led the 

court since it was established by Congress in 1966. A particularly special 

portrait was added in 2007: that of the Hon. Consuelo B. Marshall, who 

led the court from 2001 to 2005.

Judge Marshall was the first woman to serve as chief district judge in the 

district’s 41-year history. It was another first for Judge Marshall, who, in 

1980, became the first African-American woman appointed to a federal 

court west of the Mississippi, and, in 1962, was the first woman attorney 

of any race to serve in the office of the Los Angeles city attorney.

She is the second African-American to lead the Central District, one of 

the nation’s largest trial courts, following Senior Circuit Judge Terry J. 

Hatter, Jr., who served from 1998 to 2001.

Judge Marshall’s portrait was unveiled at a special ceremony held 

October 26, 2007, at the courthouse. Several hundred guests attended, 

including many of her colleagues on the district court bench, family and 

friends, elected officials, and dozens of the judge’s former law clerks.

Leading the tributes to Judge Marshall was the Hon. Ann C. Williams 

of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, a longtime friend 

who said she looked upon Judge Marshall as a model in life and the law. 

Borrowing from one of Robert F. Kennedy’s most famous quotes, she 

described Judge Marshall as a “standup woman.”

“Each time a woman stands up for an ideal 

or acts to improve the lots of others or 

strikes out at an injustice, she sends forth 

a tiny ripple of hope. Those ripples build a 

current that can sweep down the mightiest 

walls of oppression and resistance,” Judge 

Williams said.

“Judge Marshall is a stand-up woman. She 

has spent her life standing up, for herself, 

her family, her many communities, and for 

equal justice for all.”

More than 60 of Judge Marshall’s former 

law clerks joined together to commission 

famed artist Simmie Knox to paint the oilon-canvas portrait of Judge Marshall. She 

joined a select group of noteworthy subjects 

painted by Knox that includes former 

President Bill Clinton and First Lady Hillary 

Clinton, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader 

Ginsburg and the late Justice Thurgood 

Marshall.

In her remarks, Judge Marshall talked of 

the importance of family and friends, and 

of passing along knowledge to the next 

generation. She described her clerks as her 

“children in law.”

“I am so proud of all of them, the 

contributions they are making to the 

community,” she said.

As to breaking the gender barrier among 

chief judges, Judge Marshall referred to her 

two young granddaughters, who were often 

perplexed that all of the portraits on the 

courtroom walls were of men.

“They’d ask me, ‘Why aren’t there any girls 

up there, any women?’ Well, there is now,” 

she said with a smile.

portrait honors Judge Marshall

Senior District 

Judge Consuelo B. 

Marshall pictured 

along with her 

commissioned 

portrait by artist 

Simmie Knox. 
32 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

The Northern California legal community 

met at the James R. Browning United States 

Courthouse in San Francisco in May to look 

back at major court cases having significant legal and 

social impacts on Asian Americans.

The event was part of the celebration of the Asian 

Pacific American Heritage Month. Sponsors included 

the Northern California Chapter of the Federal Bar 

Association, the Asian American Bar Association of the 

Greater Bay Area, the Ninth Judicial Circuit Historical 

Society and the Northern District of California 

Historical Society.

The highlight of the evening was a panel discussion 

of key cases heard in the U.S. District Court for the 

Northern District of California and the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and ultimately decided 

by the Supreme Court of the United States. Magistrate 

Judge Edward M. Chen of the Northern District; 

attorneys Karen Kai of the Korematsu Coram Nobis 

Team and Malcom Yeung of the Asian Law Caucus, 

and Professor Edward H. Steinman of the Santa Clara 

University School of Law served as panelists. Cases 

discussed included:

Yick Wo v. Hopkins, an 1886 case in which the conviction 

of a Chinese laundry owner under a San Francisco 

ordinance was reversed because the ordinance was 

administered in a discriminatory fashion;

Korematsu v. U.S.; a 1944 case upholding the 

conviction of a California man who sought to evade the 

government’s internment of Japanese Americans during 

World War II. Under a rare legal procedure known as 

writ of error coram nobis (Latin for error before us), 

Fred T. Korematsu’s conviction was vacated by the 

district court in 1984. Ms. Kai served on the legal team 

that achieved this extraordinary vindication;

Lau v. Nichols, the 1974 case that led to bilingual 

education in the U.S. involved Chinese students in 

San Francisco. Professor Steinman argued the case on 

behalf of Lau; and Wong v. Hampton, a 1976 case which 

declared unconstitutional a Civil Service Commission 

court of appeals hosts asian pacific

heritage event, exhibit

“Remembering 1882,” pictured here is Judy Hu who 

prepared the traveling exhibit sponsored by the Chinese 

Historical Society of America.
ninth CiRCuit highlights 33

regulation barring non-citizens, including lawfully 

admitted resident aliens, from employment in the 

federal competitive civil service.

Also as part of the heritage month observance, the 

Browning Courthouse hosted a traveling exhibit that 

marked the 125th anniversary of the Chinese Exclusion 

Act, the first law to bar entry of an ethnic group on the 

premise that it endangered certain localities.

The exhibit, entitled “Remembering 1882,” was a set of eight 

panels which explored the historical debate over the 1882 

Exclusion Act, the nation’s first immigration legislation. The 

panels followed the law from its origins through its full repeal 

in 1968, the civil rights struggle of Chinese Americans and 

their allies, and the historic importance of habeas corpus in 

the Chinese American community. The traveling exhibit was 

sponsored by the Chinese Historical Society of America, 

which is based in San Francisco.

Through continuity of operations (COOP) planning, 

federal courts are preparing for operations during 

or soon after a major emergency. In 2007, the Ninth 

Circuit, through its Office of the Circuit Executive, 

played a central role in a major regional planning 

exercise focusing on a hypothetical outbreak of avian 

flu in the United States.

The Pandemic Preparedness Symposium, held 

December 5 in the auditorium of the Oakland 

Federal Building, brought together the Federal 

Executive Board, the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, the General Services 

Administration, and the Ninth Circuit. Heather 

Henson, COOP planning/coordinator for the Office 

of the Executive, served as program chair. The oneday event was intended as a warm-up for a more 

extensive program in 2008.

Symposium highlights included a keynote address by 

Dr. Erica Pan, M.D., M.P.H., who is the director of 

the Bioterrorism and Infectious Disease Emergency 

Unit at the San Francisco Department of Public 

Health. Dr. Pan covered the emerging threat of the 

H5N1 Avian Flu virus in which 355 human cases 

were reported in Asia, Africa, the Pacific, Europe 

and the near East. The mortality rate in the reported 

cases was 60 percent. 

The City and County of San Francisco also was 

represented by Vicki Hennessy, director of the 

Department of Emergency Services, who stressed the 

need for local response efforts to be tied in closely with 

the state and federal emergency plans and efforts.

Also participating was Commander Tim Gruber, 

regional emergency coordinator for the U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services, who 

discussed the agency’s capabilities and provided an 

overview of the department’s plan for a pandemic crisis.

Panel discussions covered health service capabilities, 

private sector preparedness, and problems that should 

be anticipated by federal, state, and local agencies as 

they plan for a pandemic crisis. Human capital, business 

continuity, and alternative work possibilities were 

among the topics discussed.

Concluding remarks were given by Farley Howell, 

director of the National Preparedness program 

for FEMA Region IX, who discussed how FEMA 

will continue to play a large role in exercising and 

evaluating response capabilities with a specific focus 

on pandemic planning.

federal courts do their part in coop planning
34 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

The Ninth Circuit’s annual Technology Users 

Group (TUG) conference was held August 14-16 

at the Omni Hotel in Los Angeles and drew about 

175 information technology and other court staff 

attendees. All of the judicial districts in the circuit 

were represented along with the Administrative 

Office of the United States Courts and the Office of 

the Circuit Executive.

District Judge Thomas I. Vanaskie of the U.S. District 

Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, chair 

of the Judicial Conference of the United States 

Committee on Information Technology, opened the 

conference with an overview of current IT projects 

and initiatives at the national level. 

Judge Vanaskie often has the opportunity to 

implement new technology first. His court served as 

a pilot court for the next iteration of the courts’ data 

communication network (DCN) and the Financial 

Accounting System for Tomorrow (FAS4T) server 

consolidation. Plans to modify the DCN by making 

it faster are projected to rollout in October 2008. 

The national committee implemented the JCUS 

policy on security and privacy in December 2007, 

and is providing general guidelines for management 

of the courts’ wide and local area networks. A plan to 

provide increased publicity for new court tools, such as 

JPORT which provides remote access to the desktop as an 

alternative to VPN, is in the works. 

Judge Vanaskie also introduced the Information Technology 

Fellows Program created to encourage court IT 

professionals to assume leadership roles at the national IT 

level. The program was announced in December 2007 by 

Director James C. Duff of the AO.

One of the hot topics of the conference was the creation 

of policies for wireless devices in the courtroom. A panel 

that included Judge Vanaskie, district and bankruptcy 

court clerks, a reporter from the Los Angeles Times, and 

a representative from the Office of the Circuit Executive 

addressed key questions such as whether to allow the use 

of wireless devices in the courtroom, whether to allow 

attorneys to check their personal digital assistant (PDA) 

for email during proceedings instead of passing notes, 

and whether the courts should provide WiFi access to 

attorneys, jurors, and the media.

The audience participated with great enthusiasm, and 

the use of an audience response system (ARS) was 

well received. The ARS was utilized to obtain survey of 

audience opinions in real time.

court it staff gathers in los angeles
sPace & faciliTies
36 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

Among federal courthouses, the Union Station 

Courthouse in Tacoma may well be unique. Not 

only does it occupy a wonderfully-restored, near 

century-old train depot, it also provides a showcase for 

elaborate blown-glass art created on a grand scale.

The courthouse has been home to the southern division 

of the U.S. District Court for the Western District 

of Washington since 1993. The building houses 10 

courtrooms and chambers for district, bankruptcy and 

magistrate judges, plus offices for court services staff, 

two congressional representatives and an art education 

coordinator.

The art in question is the work of Tacoma artist Dale 

Chihuly, a pioneer in introducing blown glass art into 

the realm of large-scale contemporary sculpture. His 

monumental art decorates the building rotunda, while 

smaller pieces are displayed elsewhere in the courthouse.

The artist’s signature piece, the “End of the Day” 

chandelier, hangs from the ceiling of the dome. Also in 

the rotunda is the Monarch Window, which looks out 

onto Mount Rainier, while another wall is adorned with 

a third piece called the Basket Mural. Visitors can enter 

the rotunda to see the artwork without entering the 

courthouse proper, and the rotunda has become a popular 

venue for weddings and other events.

Union Station was built by the Northern Pacific Railroad 

to serve as its Pacific Northwest terminus. The domed, 

classical Beaux-Arts style train terminal opened in 1911 

at a time when rail travel seemingly had no limits. But as 

travelers turned to the automobile and away from trains, 

use of the station declined steadily. By the late 1970s, only 

Amtrak was serving the city. Amtrak service ended in 1984 

and the station was shuttered a year later.

tacoMa courthouse provides unique

Mix of history and art

Tacoma’s treasured Union Station, below, serves as the 

entrance to the U.S. District Court. Inside the rotunda 

are blown glass art works by famed artist Dale Chihuly, 

a Tacoma native. The include the Monarch Window, 

above, and, facing page, the End of the Day chandelier 

and other works. Senior District Judge Robert J. Bryan 

has his chambers in the building.
spACe And FACilities 37

Amid talk of razing the building, Tacoma 

citizens rallied to save the station. A 

letter to the editor suggesting the federal 

courts might make use of the building led 

a local congressman to push for federal 

participation. The property eventually was 

transferred to the City of Tacoma, which, 

in turn, entered into a 30-year lease with 

the General Services Administration, which 

agreed to restore and refurbish the building 

for court use. The property will be turned 

over to the federal government when the 

lease expires.

The project included a 120,000-squarefoot addition immediately north of the 

station. Courtrooms in the new building 

are interchangeable and can be used by 

all judges. The bars separating spectators 

from participants in the courtrooms can be 

moved to accommodate crowds, and the jury 

boxes also are expanded to seat additional 

jurors. The building also allows for future 

expansion.

The restoration of Union Station is credited 

with helping revive Tacoma’s Pacific Avenue 

neighborhood. Other developments to 

follow the courthouse project included the 

University of Washington’s Tacoma campus, 

the Washington State History Museum, the 

Tacoma Art Museum and the International 

Museum of Glass.

“It was kind of exciting to watch the 

community develop around us,” observed 

Senior District Judge Robert J. Bryan, who 

became involved with the project shortly 

after being appointed to the court in 1986. 

“We’re very proud of how everything has 

turned out.”
38 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

Los Angeles

U.S. Courthouse

Gross Square Footage: 1,016,300

Architects: Perkins & Will Architecture

Great Falls

U.S. Courthouse

Gross Square Footage: 48,411

Project Completion Date: 2009

Architects: BC Development 

 with Hoefer Wysocki Architects, LLC

Coeur d’Alene

U.S. Courthouse

Gross Square Footage: 63,079

Project Completion Date: 2008

Architects: ALSC Architects

courthouses under construction

in design phase

San Diego

U.S. Courthouse

Gross Square Footage: 619,644

Architects: Richard Meier & Partners
The Work of The courTs
40 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

After a long upward trend, the number of appeals filed 

with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 

declined for the second consecutive year. The court 

received 12,685 new appeals in 2007, down 8.3 percent from 

2006. Appellate filings nationally were down 9 percent with 

10 of the 12 regional courts of appeal reporting decreases. The 

Ninth Circuit continued to have the largest share of new filings, 

21.9 percent of the national total.

The court terminated 13,300 cases for the year. The court 

ruled on the merits in 6,531 appeals, while judges and staff 

disposed of 6,276 cases before the completion of briefing for 

jurisdictional defects or because the result was manifest from 

the face of the record.

The downturn in new Ninth Circuit filings reflected a 

continuing decline in immigration appeals, which had risen 

626 percent between 2001 and 2005. The deluge resulted from 

accelerated review and frequent rejection of asylum and other 

requests by the Board of Immigration Appeals. Federal law 

allows BIA decisions to be appealed to circuit courts.

Appeals of BIA actions declined 14.2 percent in 2007. Still, the 

4,430 BIA appeals received in 2007 once again constituted the 

largest category of new appeals, amounting to 34.9 percent of 

the court’s total filings. 

Breakdown of New Appeals

Appeals of administrative decisions by federal agencies, which 

include the 4,430 BIA matters, numbered 4,625 or 36.5 percent of 

the new appeals in 2007. It was the largest category of new filings. 

Appeals of cases originating in the federal district courts in the 

circuit numbered 7,027 in 2007, down 6.6 percent from the 

prior year. Of the appeals originating in the district courts, 

5,335, or 76 percent, were civil in nature and 1,692, 

or 24 percent, were criminal.

Rounding out the new cases were 836 original 

proceedings and 197 bankruptcy appeals. 

The Central District of California, one of the busiest 

federal trial courts in the nation, once again generated 

the largest number of appeals among the district 

courts, 1,940, or 27.6 percent of the total. The 

Central District generated 80 fewer cases, about 4 

percent less than 2006. 

Three districts generated more appeals in 2007. 

Appeals increased by 1.6 percent for the Eastern 

District of California, up 12 to 833 filings; by 9.7 

percent for the Western District of Washington, up 

43 to 485 filings; and by 21.4 percent in the District 

of the Northern Mariana Islands, up 3 cases to 17 

filings. Several districts generated significantly fewer 

appeals: Nevada had 451 appeals, 102 fewer than the 

year before; Oregon had 406 appeals, 53 fewer; and 

the Eastern District of Washington had 162 appeals, 

61 fewer.

Criminal appeals decreased by 21.5 percent in 2007, 

from 2,155 to 1,692. The decline may possibly reflect 

fewer challenges to criminal sentencing practices, 

which had spiked upward following groundbreaking 

decisions in this area of law by the U.S. Supreme 

Court in 2004 and 2005.

The circuit had 13.2 percent of criminal appeals 

filed nationally. The most numerous criminal appeals 

involved drug offenses with 463 filings, criminal 

immigration offenses with 411 filings, property 

offenses with 214 filings, and firearms and explosives 

offenses with 192 filings. Violent offenses numbered 

119, including 18 homicides. 

Total civil appeals coming from the district courts 

numbered 5,335 in 2007, down slightly from the 

prior year. The federal government was either a 

plaintiff or defendant in 1,013 of those cases, or 

19 percent. Private cases numbered 4,322, or 81 

percent. Among private cases, prisoner petitions 

court of appeals statistics

 Appellate Caseload Profile, 2006-2007

2006 2007 Change 2006-2007

Filings 13,828 12,685 -8.3%

Terminations 13,470 13,300 -1.3%

*Pending Cases 17,176 16,561 -3.6%

*Total pending cases for calendar year 2006 revised.

 

1
the woRk oF the CouRts 41

 Filings, Terminations and Pending Cases by Appeal Type, 2007

Type of Appeal

2006

Filings

2007

Filings

Change

2006-07

% of Circuit

Total

2006

Terminated

2007

Terminated

Change

2006-07

2006

Pending

2007

Pending

Change

2006-07

Civil

U.S. Prisoner

Petitions 390 357 -8.5% 2.8% 413 397 -3.9% 357 319 -10.6%

Private Prisoner

Petitions 2,277 2,372 4.2% 18.7% 2,004 2,214 10.5% 1,918 2,079 8.4%

Other U.S. Civil 633 656 3.6% 5.2% 528 651 23.3% 852 860 0.9%

Other Private 

Civil 2,067 1,950 -5.7% 15.4% 1,867 2,018 8.1% 2,786 2,720 -2.4%

Criminal 2,155 1,692 -21.5% 13.3% 2,407 1,884 -21.7% 2,306 2,116 -8.2%

Other

Bankruptcy 143 197 37.8% 1.6% 155 176 13.5% 224 245 9.4%

Administrative 

Appeals 5,340 4,625 -13.4% 36.5% 5,276 5,133 -2.7% 8,486 7,992 -5.8%

Original

Proceedings 823 836 1.6% 6.6% 820 827 0.9% 222 230 3.6%

Circuit Total 13,828 12,685 -8.3% 13,470 13,300 -1.3% 17,151 16,561 -3.4%

National 

Appellate Total 63,676 57,973 -9.0% 67,699 61,462 -9.2% 55,253 51,240 -7.3%

Ninth Circuit 

as % of 

National Total 21.7% 21.9% -0.2% 19.9% 21.6% -1.7% 31.0% 32.3% 1.3%

**This table includes appeals reopened and remanded as well as original appeals. This table does not include data for the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Beginning in 2007, the category entitled “reopened,” which includes all reopened appeals, has replaced the 

category entitled “reinstated.” Data on reopened cases for 2007 and thereafter are not comparable to data published previously on reinstated 

cases. 

 

2

constituted the largest single category. In 2007, prisoners 

filed 2,372 petitions for habeas corpus, capital habeas 

corpus, civil rights, prison conditions and other causes. 

Prisoner filings constituted 44.5 percent of the civil 

appeals coming from the district courts.

Terminations and Pending Cases

The number of appeals terminated by the court in 2007 

numbered 13,300, down 1.3 percent from 13,470 in 2006. 

The number of administrative appeals terminated by the 

court was 5,133, down slightly from the year before.were 

Among appeals terminated, administrative appeals ranked 

first with 5,133, or 38.6 percent, followed by private 

prisoner petitions, 2,214, up 10.5 percent; other private 

civil matters, 2,018, up 8 percent; and criminal appeals, 

1,884, down 21.7 percent.

Of the appeals terminated, 6,276 involved procedural 

terminations by judges and court staff. Another 6,531 

cases were terminated on the merits, 1,933 cases after oral 

argument and 4,598 cases after submission of briefs. Cases 

disposed of by consolidation numbered 493.

continued
42 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

 Median Time Intervals

 Calendar Years 2006 and 2007

Number of Months

 Ninth Circuit National 

By Stage of Appeal 2006 2007 2006 2007

From Notice of Appeal to 

Filing Last Brief 6.1 6.4 5.8 5.9

From Filing Last Brief to 

Hearing or Submission 6.6 8.7 4.2 4.6

From Hearing to Final 

Disposition 1.2 1.2 2.1 2.0

From Submission to Final 

Disposition 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5

From Filing of Notice of 

Appeal to Final Disposition 15.5 18.6 12.1 12.5

From Filing in Lower Court to 

Final Disposition in Appellate 

Court 34.2 38.4 27.4 28.8

*The subtotals do not add up to the number for total cases 

because total cases include original proceedings not reported 

separately in this table. This table does not include data for the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

 

3 Source of Appeals and Original

 Proceedings, 2007

District Appeals % of Total

Alaska 89 0.7%

Arizona 777 6.1%

C. Calif. 1,940 15.3%

E. Calif. 768 6.1%

N. Calif. 833 6.6%

S. Calif. 477 3.8%

Hawaii 153 1.2%

Idaho 142 1.1%

Montana 314 2.5%

Nevada 451 3.6%

Oregon 406 3.2%

E. Wash. 162 1.3%

W. Wash. 485 3.8%

Guam 13 0.1%

Northern Mariana Islands 17 0.1%

Bankruptcy 197 1.6%

Administrative Agencies, Total 4,625 36.5%

 IRS 94 0.7%

 National Labor Relations Board 29 0.2%

 BIA 4,430 34.9%

 Other Administrative Agencies 72 0.6%

*Original Proceedings 836 34.9%

Circuit Total 12,685

*Totals include reopened and remanded appeals as well as 

original appeals. This table does not include data for the U.S. 

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, administrative agency 

cases previously reported as immigration service (INS) are 

shown under Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) and U.S. Tax 

Court is shown under IRS.

 4

 Proceedings, 2007
The Work of the Courts 43

Among the 6,531 cases decided on the merits, 4,208 

cases, or 64.4 percent, were affirmed or enforced. The 

remaining 2,323 were dismissed, reversed, remanded 

or terminated by other means. The reversal rate was 6.2 

percent.

En banc courts, used to decide intra-circuit conflicts and 

other important legal matters, heard 18 cases in 2007. 

The court ended the year with 16,561 pending cases, 

down from 17,176 cases in 2006.

Median Time Intervals

Median time intervals, which measure how long it takes 

for cases decided on the merits to proceed through 

the appellate process, slipped for the Ninth Circuit in 

2007. The median time interval from filing of a notice 

of appeal to final disposition of a case was 18.6 in 2007, 

an increase from 15.5 months in 2006. The median time 

interval from the filing of a case in a lower court to final 

disposition by the Ninth Circuit was 38.4 months, an 

increase from 34.2 months in 2006. 

Once an appeal was fully briefed, Ninth Circuit judges 

decided cases fairly quickly. In 2007, the median time 

interval for final disposition was 1.2 months for a case in 

which oral arguments were heard, and .2 months for a 

case submitted on briefs.

National median time intervals also increased, but 

were shorter than those of the Ninth Circuit. National 

median times were 12.5 months from notice of appeal 

to final disposition by a circuit court of appeals, and 28.8 

months from the filing of a case in a lower court to final 

disposition by a circuit court. 

Pro Se Filings and Terminations

Pro se appeals, in which at least one party is not 

represented by legal counsel, continue to represent a large 

portion of the Ninth Circuit’s appellate caseload. New pro 

se filings numbered 5,498 in 2007, down 2.5 percent from 

2006. Private prisoner petitions and administrative appeals 

ranked first and second among categories of pro se filings 

with 1,909 and 1,714 cases, respectively.

The Ninth Circuit terminated of 5,330 pro se cases in 

2007, most on procedural grounds. 

Contributions by Active, Senior 

and Visiting Judges

The court had 27 active circuit judges and 23 senior circuit 

judges for most of 2007. Active circuit judges participated 

in 64 percent of the cases terminated on the merits during 

the year. Senior circuit judges participated in 30.9 percent, 

while visiting judges helped decide 5.2 percent.

In addition to sitting on panels, senior circuit judges served 

on screening and motions panels and various administrative 

court committees.
44 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

F

ederal district courts serve as trial courts in the federal court 

system. Criminal and civil case filings in the federal district 

courts of the Ninth Circuit increased slightly in 2007. Courts 

in the circuit’s 15 judicial districts reported a total of 55,093 filings, 

up 1.2 percent from the prior year. They accounted for 17.5 percent 

of the national federal district court caseload of 315,105 filings. 

Overall, national filings decreased by 6.4 percent in 2007.

district court filings

Criminal Filings, Terminations and 

Pending Cases

Criminal filings in district courts of the circuit 

totaled 14,615 in 2007, up 15.3 percent from 

the prior year. Criminal filings accounted for 

26.5 percent of the circuit’s total district court 

filings. Immigration offenses were the largest 

category, numbering 5,932 and constituting 40.6 

percent of the total criminal filings. Drug offenses 

followed with 2,944 filings, or 20.1 percent of 

the total.

Increases were reported in 12 of 19 categories 

of criminal filings. Categories with the largest 

increases were improper reentry by an alien, 

3,924 filings, up 39.5 percent from 2006, 

followed by fraud, 1,777 filings, up 35.8 percent, 

and traffic offenses, 515 filings, up 34.2 percent. 

Nationwide, criminal filings (excluding transfers) 

numbered 68,565, up 3.7 percent from 66,094 

in 2006. District courts of the Ninth Circuit 

accounted for 21.2 percent of the national 

criminal caseload, up 2.2 percent from last 

year. They had 33.7 percent of the criminal 

immigration cases and 17.5 percent of the drug 

offense cases filed nationally in 2007.

Eleven out of 15 districts reported increases in 

criminal filings in 2007. The Southern District 

of California had the largest numerical increase, 

reporting 3,455 filings, up 25 percent from 2,763 

cases the year before, followed by the Central 

District of California with 1,633 new cases, up 

50.2 percent; the District of Arizona with 4,082 

new cases, up 16.6 percent; and the District of 

Hawaii, with 426 new cases, up 22.8 percent.

The only decreases in criminal case filings were 

reported by the District of Nevada, which had 350 

cases, down 24.4 percent; the Eastern District 

of Washington, which had 332 cases, down 13.8 

percent; the District of Guam, which had 116 

cases, down 7.9 percent; and the District of 

Oregon, which had 646 cases, down 3.1 percent.

 U.S. District Courts - Total Criminal and Civil 

 Cases Filed, Terminated, and Pending

 Period: 12 Months Ending December 31, 2007

2006 2007 Change 2006-2007

Civil Filings 41,759 40,478 -3.1%

Criminal Filings 12,672 14,615 15.3%

Total Filings 54,431 55,093 1.2%

Civil Terminations 40,800 39,245 -3.8%

Criminal Terminations 13,334 15,048 12.9%

Total Terminations 54,134 54,293 0.3%

 *Pending Civil Cases 40,136 41,369 3.1%

 *Pending Criminal Cases 13,266 12,833 -3.3%

 *Total Pending Cases 53,402 54,202 1.5%

Civil Case Termination Index

(in months) 11.8 12.7 7.6%

*Criminal Case Termination 

Index (in months) 11.9 10.2 -14.3%

*Overall Case Termination Index 11.8 11.9 0.8%

Median Months (from filing to 

disposition) Civil Cases 8.3 7.8 -6.0%

Median Months (from filing to 

disposition) Criminal Defendants 7.1 6.4 -9.9%

Median Months National Total 

(from filing to disposition)

Civil Cases 7.9 8.7 10.1%

Median Months National Total 

from filing to disposition)

Criminal Defendants 7.1 7.0 -1.4%

Median time intervals computed only for 10 or more cases and only for 

10 or more defendants. Median time intervals from filing to disposition 

of civil cases terminated, by district and method of disposition, excludes 

land condemnation, prisoner petitions, deportation reviews, recovery of 

overpayments and enforcement of judgments. Median time intervals from 

filing to disposition of criminal defendants disposed of, by district, excludes 

transfers.

*Revised

 

continued
the woRk oF the CouRts 45

 Ninth Circuit District Courts - Types of Criminal Cases Commenced, 

 by Major Offense and District (Excluding Transfers), 2007

AK AZ

C. 

Calif.

E. 

Calif.

N. 

Calif.

S. 

Calif. HI ID MT NV OR

E. 

Wash.

W. 

Wash. Guam NMI Total

Violent Offenses

Homicide 1 17 3 0 0 1 0 0 9 04 1 3 0 0 39

Robbery 2 9 27 6 9 14 4 2 1 23 23 3 11 0 0 134

Assault 2 124 18 29 10 24 12 13 23 3 9 5 10 0 1 283

Other 3 24 6 4 3 2 1 2 5 2 1 9 4 0 0 66

Property Offenses

Burglary, Larceny 

& Theft 4 88 59 67 44 4 39 4 6 17 44 11 175 39 2 603

Embezzlement 12 7 12 1 5 1 3 6 5 11 11 1 4 00 79

Fraud 26 674 361 121 122 125 32 18 51 58 61 16 85 22 5 1,777

Forgery & 

Counterfeiting 1 7 41 13 6 2 1 2 4 2 5 4 1 1 0 90

Other 0 2 0 5 1 1 3 0 2 2 3 1 6 2 0 28

Drug Offenses

Marijuana 3 350 7 37 2 715 14 2 5 2 30 7 64 0 0 1,238

All Other Drugs 57 243 126 177 73 395 102 36 79 42 98 66 185 11 16 1,706

Firearms and

Explosives 

Offenses 15 198 85 66 47 47 34 52 99 38 73 70 62 15 0 901

Sex Offenses 9 53 61 59 44 11 7 17 70 21 32 18 32 0 0 434

Justice System 

Offenses 3 36 14 10 18 26 5 0 5 3 8 11 13 1 0 153

Immigration Offenses

Improper Alien 

Reentry 5 1,939 649 171 171 592 2 88 38 95 53 88 27 6 0 3,924

Other 0 245 30 12 10 1,459 1 2 9 13 148 4 71 4 0 2,008

General 

Offenses 2 14 38 25 14 15 8 2 26 10 13 4 78 1 0 250

Regulatory 

Offenses 20 41 77 35 29 12 9 2 6 3 23 5 24 8 0 294

Traffic Offenses 5 4 5 46 23 0 148 0 3 0 0 3 272 6 0 515

All Offenses Total 170 4,075 1,619 884 631 3,446 425 248 446 345 639 327 1,127 116 24 14,522

This table includes all felony and Class A misdemeanor cases but includes only those petty offense cases that have been assigned to 

district judges.

 

6
46 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

 Ninth Circuit District Courts 

 Weighted and Unweighted Filings Per Authorized Judgeship

 Period: 12 Months Ending December 31, 2007

Unweighted Filings Per Judgeship Weighted Filings Per Judgeship

District

Authorized

 Judgeships Civil Criminal

Supervised 

Release 

Hearings Total Civil Criminal

Supervised

Release 

Hearings

2007

Weighted 

Total

2006

Weighted 

Total

Change

2006-2007

Alaska 3 108 74 4.00 186 131 67 0.75 199 198 0.5%

Arizona 13 268 369 107.23 744 272 241 15.04 528 535 -1.3%

C. Calif. 28 408 78 40.36 527 501 62 5.67 569 519 9.6%

E. Calif. 6 732 209 60.17 1,002 682 176 8.45 866 952 -9.0%

N. Calif. 14 443 55 35.14 533 569 41 4.94 615 650 -5.4%

S. Calif. 13 188 305 88.69 581 226 188 12.54 427 442 -3.4%

Hawaii 4 156 132 37.00 325 193 92 5.42 290 324 -10.5%

Idaho 2 269 175 44.50 489 322 177 6.55 505 438 15.3%

Montana 3 195 177 48.33 420 199 173 7.27 379 377 0.5%

Nevada 7 337 61 30.00 427 412 50 4.34 466 490 -4.9%

Oregon 6 403 139 57.67 600 430 119 8.25 558 559 -0.2%

E. Wash. 4 150 117 81.50 348 157 102 11.59 270 239 13.0%

W. Wash. 7 396 193 39.43 629 471 119 6.07 596 557 7.0%

Circuit 

Total 110 4,053 2,084 674 6,811 4,565 1,607 96.88 6,268 6,280 -0.2%

Circuit 

Mean *** 312 160 51.85 524 351 124 7.45 482 483 -0.2%

Circuit 

Median *** 269 139 44.5 527 322 119 6.55 505 490 3.1%

National 

Mean *** 322 133 32.82 487 356 107 4.78 468 478 -2.1%

Case weights are based on the 2003-2004 district court case weighting study conducted by the Federal Judicial Center. This table 

excludes civil cases arising by reopening, remand, or transfer to the district by the order of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. 

This table includes defendants in all felony and Class A misdemeanor cases, but includes only those petty offense defendants whose 

cases have been assigned to district judges. Remands and reopens for criminal defendants are excluded. This table excludes data for 

the territorial courts. Data are reported for supervised release and probation hearings (both evidentiary and non-evidentiary) previously 

not presented in this are obtained from the monthly reports of trials and other court activities conducted by resident and visiting judges. 

Due to rounding, subtotals for weighted and unweighted civil, criminal, and revocation filings may not equal totals for weighted and 

unweighted filings.

 

7
The Work of the Courts 47

Immigration and drug offenses dominated the criminal 

dockets in the District of Arizona and the Southern District 

of California. In Arizona, immigration made up 53.5 

percent of criminal cases commenced, while drug offenses 

accounted for 14.5 percent. In the Southern District of 

California, immigration made up 59.4 percent of criminal 

cases opened, while drug offenses accounted for 32.1 percent.

The number of criminal cases terminated by district courts 

in the circuit numbered 15,048 in 2007, up 12.9 percent 

from the prior year. The number of pending criminal cases 

decreased to 12,833, down 3.3 percent from 2006.

Civil Filings, Terminations and Pending Cases 

Civil filings in the Ninth Circuit district courts declined 

3.1 percent to 40,478 new cases in 2007. The circuit 

accounted for 16.5 percent of the 246,039 civil filings in 

the district courts nationally in 2007. National civil filings 

were down 8.9 percent over the prior year.

Private civil cases accounted for 77.1 percent of all 

new civil filings in district courts of the circuit. The 

U.S. government acted as a plaintiff or defendant in 

the remaining 22.9 percent of the new filings. Prisoner 

petitions made up 33.2 percent of all new private civil 

cases, up slightly from the prior year. Other major 

categories of new private civil filings were civil rights, 15 

percent; contracts, 12 percent; and copyright, patent and 

trademark cases, 9.5 percent. 

Among civil filings in which the government was a party, 

the most numerous were Social Security, which accounted 

for 29.8 percent; prisoner petitions, 11 percent; and 

motions to vacate 10.7 percent.

Nine out of 15 districts in the circuit reported fewer 

new civil cases. The largest decrease was reported by 

the Northern District of California, which had 6,756 

filings, down 17.3 percent from 8,171 filings in 2006. The 

District of Arizona followed at 3,574, down 8.3 percent, 

and the Eastern District of California at 4,530, down 6.2 

percent.

Elsewhere in the circuit, increases in new civil filings 

were reported in the districts of Central California, 

Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Eastern Washington, and Western 

Washington. 

Civil case terminations numbered 39,245, down 3.8 percent 

from 40,800 in 2006. The number of pending civil cases was 

41,369, up 3.1 percent from 40,136 the prior year.

Case Processing Times

Case processing times in the district courts of the 

Ninth Circuit’s remained relatively stable in 2007. The 

Case Termination Index, which computes how long it 

would take to clear the pending caseload if the current 

termination rate remained constant, was 11.9 months in 

2007, a slight increase from 11.8 in 2006.

The median time from filing to disposition for civil cases 

was 7.8 months, a slight improvement over the 8.3 months 

reported in 2006. Due to increased filings, the national 

median time for civil cases was 8.7 months in 2007 

compared with 7.9 months in 2006.

For criminal cases, the median time from filing to 

disposition was the same for the circuit and nationally: 

7 months, down slightly from 7.1 months in 2006.
48 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

After bottoming out in 2006, bankruptcy filings nationwide 

increased in 2007. Bankruptcy courts nationally reported 

850,912 new filings, up 37.8 percent from 617,660 cases 

opened in 2006. Bankruptcy courts in the Ninth Circuit reported 

127,392 filings, an increase of 62.3 percent from 78,505 filings in 

2006. The circuit accounted for 15 percent of the 2007 national filings.

Non-business filings continued to make up the majority of new 

bankruptcy filings nationally and in the circuit. Non-business filings 

nationally made up nearly 97 percent of the total filings in 2007 with 

822,590 new cases. In the circuit, non-business filings totaled 122,043 

new cases, or 96 percent of the total.

Filings under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy 

Code were the most common type of filing 

among both business and non-business filers. 

Chapter 7 filings nationally totaled 538,115, 

or 63.2 percent of the total. In the circuit, 

Chapter 7 filings numbered 95,538, or 75 

percent of the total filings in the circuit.

Bankruptcy Filings by Chapter

Chapter 7 allows non-business filers to keep 

certain exempt property, including primary 

residences, while the remaining property is 

sold to pay creditors. 

Businesses filings under Chapter 7 are 

liquidated and terminated. In the Ninth Circuit 

in 2007, Chapter 7 was used by 72 percent 

of non-business filers and 69.3 percent of 

business filers.

Chapter 13 was the second largest category of 

bankruptcy filings among non-business filers. 

Under Chapter 13 bankruptcy, creditors may 

be repaid in installments, in full or in part, 

over three to five years and debts may not 

exceed a statutory amount. Chapter 13 is 

available for individuals operating businesses as 

sole proprietorships, but not for partnerships 

or corporations. 

In 2007, non-business Chapter 13 filings 

totaled 321,359 nationally, 39.1 percent of the 

total, and 33,726 in the circuit, 27.6 percent 

of the total. Business Chapter 13 filings 

numbered 3,412 nationally, 12 percent of the 

total, and 594 in the circuit, 11.1 percent of 

the total. 

Chapter 11 was second largest category of 

bankruptcy filings among business filers, 

numbering 5,736 nationally, 20.1 percent 

of the total business filings, and 1,009 in 

the circuit, 19 percent of all business filings. 

Chapter 11 allows a business to continue to 

operate while formulating a plan to repay its 

banKruptcy court filings

 Business and Non-Business Bankruptcy Cases

 Commenced by Chapter of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code

 Period: 12 Months Ending December 31, 2007

Caseload Measure 2006 2007 Change 2006-2007

Filings

 Business Chapter 7 2,180 3,705 70.0%

 Business Chapter 11 725 1,009 39.2%

 Business Chapter 12 45 36 -20.0%

 Business Chapter 13 454 594 30.8%

 Non-Business Chapter 7 56,035 88,128 57.3%

 Non-Business Chapter 11 120 189 57.5%

 Non-Business Chapter 13 18,934 33,726 78.1%

 *Total 78,505 127,392 62.3%

Terminations 223,414 125,713 -43.7%

**Pending Cases 142,081 140,931 -0.8%

*Chapter 15 was added and section 304 was terminated by changes in the 

bankruptcy laws effective October 17, 2005.

 (1) Section 101 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code defines consumer (non-business) 

debt as that incurred by an individual primarily for a personal, family, or 

household purpose. If the debtor is a corporation or a partnership, or if debt 

related to operation of a business predominates, the nature of the debt is 

business.

These figures include the following cases not reflected elsewhere:

Calendar Year 2006: Arizona (Chapter 15 = 1); Central Calif. (Chapter 9 = 1 and 

Chapter 15 = 1); Eastern Calif. (Chapter 15 = 3); Northern Calif. (Chapter 9 = 1 

and Chapter 15 = 2); Hawaii (Chapter 15 = 2); Western Wash. (Chapter 15 = 1) 

Calendar Year 2007: Central Calif. (Chapter 9 = 1 and Chapter 15 = 1); Eastern 

Calif. (Chapter 15 = 1); Northern Calif. (Chapter 9 = 1); and Arizona (Chapter 15 

= 1); Central Calif. (Chapter 9 = 1 and Chapter 15 = 1); Eastern Calif. (Chapter 

15 = 3); Northern Calif.

**Pending cases for 2007 revised.

 Business and Non-Business Bankruptcy Cases
The Work of the Courts 49

creditors. Although used less commonly in non-business 

filings, it also allows an individual to use future earnings to 

pay off creditors. Non-business Chapter 11 filings totaled 

617 nationally and 189 in the circuit.

The smallest category of filings was Chapter 12, which is 

available only to business filers and provides family farmers 

facing bankruptcy a chance to reorganize their debts and 

keep their farms. Chapter 12 business filings numbered 

376 nationally, 1.3 percent of the total, and 36 in the 

circuit, .7 percent of the total.

Bankruptcy Filings by District

Fourteen out of 15 bankruptcy courts in the circuit 

reported increased filings, ranging from 1.8 percent in 

Montana to 98.5 percent in Nevada.

The Central District of California reported 34,028 new 

bankruptcy filings, the most in the Ninth Circuit and the 

second most in the nation in 2007. Its non-business filings 

numbered 32,248, 94.7 percent of the total. Chapter 7 

filings numbered 25,668, 75.4 percent of the total.

The Eastern District of California reported 18,052 new 

filings in 2007, followed by the Northern District of 

California, 12,599; the Western District of Washington, 

11,224; the District of Nevada, 10,953; and the District 

of Arizona, 10,920. 

Terminations and Pending Cases

Bankruptcy case terminations nationally numbered 

891,783 in 2007, down 37.9 percent from the prior year, 

while pending cases totaled 1,320,726, down 3 percent. 

In the Ninth Circuit, terminations totaled 125,713, down 

43.7 percent, while pending cases numbered 143,759, up 

1.2 percent.

Appointments, Transitions

In 2007, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals appointed 

one bankruptcy judge, Judge Robert N. Kwan, who 

was appointed to the Central District of California on 

February 5.

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District 

of Washington saw the elevation of Chief Bankruptcy 

Judge Frank L. Kurtz in January 2007. Judge Kurtz was 

appointed a bankruptcy judge on November 1, 2005. He 

succeeded Judge Patricia C. Williams as chief. 

Recalled Bankruptcy Judge John L. Peterson from 

the District of Montana became the recalled judges’ 

representative on the Conference of Chief Bankruptcy 

Judges in January 2007. Judge Peterson, a 45-year veteran 

of the bankruptcy bench, succeeded Judge Richard T. 

Ford. 

Ninth Circuit bankruptcy courts continue to rely on 

recalled judges to relieve the active bankruptcy judges. 

During 2007, six recalled bankruptcy judges assisted in 

six districts.
50 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

All district courts within the Ninth Circuit 

have issued general orders providing for the 

automatic referral of bankruptcy appeals to 

the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) for disposition. 

However, if any party files a timely election to have 

the appeal heard by a district court, the appeal is 

transferred according to the consent rule. Seven 

bankruptcy judges are authorized by the Ninth Circuit 

Judicial Council to serve on the BAP. Over the past 

five years, one position has been left vacant due to 

reduced workload based on new filings. 

New Filings

For the 2007 calendar year, 658 new appeals were 

filed. BAP heard 58 percent of all bankruptcy appeals, 

while 42 percent went to district courts. Historically, 

the percentage of appeals that the BAP has handled 

has ranged between 50 percent and 60 percent. Over 

the last seven years, bankruptcy appeal filings have 

declined significantly, from a high of 904 in 2002 to 

an all-time low of 658 in 2007. The decline in appeal 

filings is expected to continue in 2008 due to the 

decline in underlying bankruptcy case filings. Table 9 

shows bankruptcy appeal filings by district for 2007.

Dispositions

The BAP disposed of 511 appeals in 2007. Of those, 

177 appeals were merits terminations. Oral argument 

was held in 162 appeals, and 15 appeals were 

submitted on briefs. Of the 177 merits decisions, 38 

were published opinions. The reversal rate was 19.2 

percent. The median time for an appeal decided on 

the merits was 8.9 months, down from 11.4 months 

in 2006. The remaining 334 closed appeals were 

terminated on procedural grounds, such as for lack 

of prosecution, lack of jurisdiction, consolidation, 

or based on voluntary dismissal. The BAP ended the 

period with 201 appeals pending.

Appeals to the Ninth Circuit

Appeals from a decision of either the BAP or a district court 

may be filed with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for 

second-level appellate review. In 2007, 197 second-level 

appeals were filed. Of these, 85 were appeals from decisions 

by the BAP and 112 were from decisions by the district courts. 

Thus, of the 511 appeals that were disposed of by the BAP, 

roughly 83 percent were fully resolved, with only about 17 

percent seeking second-level review.

banKruptcy appellate panel

 New Bankruptcy Appeal Filings

 Period: 12 Months Ending December 31, 2007

District

Bankruptcy 

Appellate Panel *District Court Total

Alaska 0 3 3

Arizona 53 28 81

C. Calif. 125 106 231

E. Calif. 45 24 69

N. Calif. 46 36 82

S. Calif. 44 13 57

Hawaii 9 7 16

Idaho 3 2 5

Montana 11 6 17

Nevada 9 15 24

Oregon 6 9 15

E. Wash. 2 3 5

W. Wash. 26 27 53

TOTALS 379 (58%) 279 (42%) 658

*The numbers for bankruptcy appeals to the district courts are taken 

directly from a statistical caseload table prepared by the Administrative 

Office of the United States Courts (“AOUSC Table B-23”). The numbers 

for bankruptcy appeals to the BAP are calculated based on data from 

AOUSC Table B-23, and on data from the BAP’s ICMS docketing 

system. The district court numbers include all appeals in which a timely 

election was made to have the appeal heard in the district court (both 

appellant and appellee elections). The BAP numbers exclude all such 

appeals.

 
the woRk oF the CouRts 51

of the Ninth Circuit. He also serves on the Committee on 

Criminal Rules of the Judicial Conference of the United 

States. Judge Battaglia’s term as chair of the board expires in 

September 2008. 

In 2007, the Magistrate Judges Executive Board fine tuned their 

charter to indicate that the term of new members shall begin at 

the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference, before a board member’s 

term expires. The full magistrate judges in his or her district 

shall select a replacement, and the outgoing member shall notify 

the chair of the selection before the circuit conference, and a 

member may designate a substitute magistrate judge to attend 

any meeting when a member is unable to attend.

The Magistrate Judges Executive Board also participated in the 

orientation of new magistrate judges after their May meeting 

in San Francisco with a program on settlement conferences. 

Judge Dennis Cavanaugh, chair of the Judicial Conference of 

the U.S. Committee on the Administration of the Magistrate 

Judges System, and Thomas Hnatowski, chief, Magistrate 

Magistrate judges assist district judges in 

a range of judicial matters, including 

presiding over preliminary proceedings 

and jurisdictional matters, some criminal and civil 

cases, various other criminal and civil hearings, and 

prisoner petitions. In the Ninth Circuit, 95 full-time 

and 11 part-time magistrate judges made significant 

contributions to the work of their courts in 2007.

The total number of matters disposed of by magistrate 

judges in the Ninth Circuit was 177,890 in 2007, a 

slight increase of 0.3 percent from 2006. Decreases 

were reported in 18 categories including criminal 

motions, down 41.5 percent, criminal evidentiary 

proceedings, down 40.1 percent, and civil evidentiary 

proceedings, down 29.4 percent. Increases were seen 

in 15 categories including evidentiary proceedings for 

prisoner petitions, which jumped 66.7 percent from 

2006, Class A misdemeanors for trial jurisdiction cases 

were up 54.9 percent from the prior year, and civil 

motions with an increase of 14.5 percent from 2006.

Magistrate judges presided over 1,041 more initial 

appearances for preliminary proceedings, up 4.9 

percent from the year before. They also reviewed 937 

more civil motions, an increase of 6.1 percent from 

2006. State habeas petitions were up 11.2 percent from 

the year before and accounted for 50.5 percent of all 

prisoner petitions.

New Magistrate Judges and Governance

Six new magistrate judges were sworn into office over 

the course of the year. They were Judge Gary S. Austin 

of the Eastern District of California, Judge Michelle 

Hamilton Burns of the District of Arizona, Judge 

Mark Clarke of the District of Oregon, Judge Alicia 

Rosenberg of the Central District of California, Judge 

Deborah M. Smith of the District of Alaska, and Judge 

Keith Strong of the District of Montana.

Magistrate Judge Anthony J. Battaglia of the Southern 

District of California serves as chair for the Magistrate 

Judges Executive Board. He succeeded Magistrate 

Judge J. Kelley Arnold of the Western District of 

Washington in October 2006. Judge Battaglia serves as 

an official observer at meetings of the Judicial Council 

Magistrate Judge Matters

The Magistrate Judges Executive Board consists of: seated 

from left, Leslie E. Kobayashi, vice-chair, of Hawaii, 

Anthony J. Battaglia, chair, of Southern California, J. Kelley 

Arnold of Western Washington; middle row from left, James 

Larson of Northern California, Cynthia Imbrogno of the 

Eastern Washington, Joaquin V.E. Manibusan of Guam, and 

Ralph Zarefsky of Central California; and back row from 

left, Gregory G. Hollows of Eastern California, Karen L. 

Strombom of Western Washington, Robert A. McQuaid of 

Nevada, and Mikel H. Williams of Idaho. Not pictured: 

Judges Carolyn S. Ostby of Montana, John D. Roberts of 

Alaska, and Janice M. Stewart of Oregon.
52 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

1 Before 2000, category included contested 

motions only. Beginning in 2000, uncontested 

motions were added.

2 Before 2000, category did not include 

status conferences. Beginning in 2000, status 

conferences were added.

3 Category includes writs, mental competency 

hearings, and motion hearings.

4 Category includes fee applications, summary 

jury trials, and motion hearings. Beginning in 2006, 

early neutral evaluations were added.

5 Category includes material witness hearings and 

attorney appointment hearings.

6 Before 2000, this category included seizure/

inspection warrants and orders of entry; judgement 

debtor exams; extradition hearings, contempt 

proceedings; Criminal Justice Act fee applications; 

naturalization proceedings; grand jury returns; 

civil and criminal IRS enforcement proceedings; 

calendar calls; and voir dire. Beginning in 

2000, civil and criminal other jury matters and 

international prisoner transfer proceedings were 

added.

Judges Division attended the May meeting. 

The new members of the board in 2007 

include Magistrate Judges David K. Duncan of 

Phoenix, Stephen J. Hillman of Los Angeles, 

and Deborah M. Smith of Anchorage.

Educational Programs

At the 2007 Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference 

in Honolulu, Hawaii, the Magistrate Judges 

Education program featured a panel of judges, 

lawyers, and an information technology 

expert who discussed issues on electronic 

discovery. Judge Anthony J. Battaglia 

moderated the panel which consisted 

of Magistrate Judge Leslie Kobayashi of 

Honolulu, Magistrate Judge Louisa Porter of 

San Diego, attorneys Maria Acker and Jeffrey 

Portnoy, and IT expert Adam Bendell. The 

panel focused on practical implementation of 

eDiscovery rules to help judges and lawyers 

recognize which aspects of the rules may 

present ambiguities in context and how to 

avoid such ambiguities in advanced.

 Matters Disposed of by Ninth Circuit Magistrate Judges

 Period:12 Months Ending September 30, 2007

Activity 2006 2007

Percent Change

2006-2007

Total Matters 177,419 177,890 0.3%

Preliminary Proceedings 81,919 80,158 -2.1%

 Search Warrants 8,219 7,730 -5.9%

 Arrest Warrants/Summonses 6,064 5,529 -8.8%

 Initial Appearances 23,546 24,587 4.4%

 Preliminary Examinations 5,448 5,693 4.5%

 Arraignments 14,174 13,987 -1.3%

 Detention Hearings 13,746 13,642 -0.8%

 Bail Reviews/Nebbia Hearings 3,664 2,900 -20.9%

 Other5 7,058 6,090 -13.7%

Trial Jurisdiction Cases 20,414 21,617 5.9%

 Class A Misdemeanors 1,139 1,764 54.9%

 Petty Offenses 19,275 19,853 3.0%

Civil Consent Cases 2,884 2,459 -14.7%

 Without Trial 2,819 2,398 -14.9%

 Jury Trial 42 37 -11.9%

 Nonjury Trial 23 24 4.3%

Additional Duties

 Criminal 27,368 28,159 2.9%

 Motions 636(b)(1)(A)1 11,283 11,968 6.1%

 Motions 636(b)(1)(B) 1,107 648 -41.5%

 Evidentiary Proceedings 274 164 -40.1%

 Pretrial Conferences2 2,488 2,621 5.3%

 Probation Revocation and

 Supervised Release Hearings 1,191 1,034 -13.2%

 Guilty Pleas 6,685 6,771 1.3%

 Other3 4,340 4,953 14.1%

 Civil 28,996 29,544 1.9%

 Settlement Conferences 3,426 3,193 -6.8%

 Other Pretrial Conferences2

4,215 4,048 -4.0%

 Motions 636(b)(1)(A)1 15,239 16,176 6.1%

 Motions 636(b)(1)(B) 999 1,144 14.5%

 Evidentiary Proceedings 34 24 -29.4%

 Social Security 919 735 -20.0%

 Special Masterships 96 107 11.5%

 Other4 4,068 4,117 1.2%

 Prisoner Petitions 5,590 5,723 2.4%

 State Habeas 2,600 2,892 11.2%

 Federal Habeas 430 359 -16.5%

 Civil Rights 2,515 2,397 -4.7%

 Evidentiary Proceedings 45 75 66.7%

Miscellaneous Matters6 10,248 10,230 -0.2%

 
the woRk oF the CouRts 53

F

ederal public defenders and community defenders in 

nine of 14 judicial districts of the Ninth Circuit saw 

their workloads increase in fiscal year 2007 (ending 

September 30, 2007). A big jump in the number of new cases 

opened in Arizona along with modest growth in three other 

districts resulted in a net caseload increase for the circuit.

Ninth Circuit defenders opened 28,676 new cases in FY2007, 

up 11.2 percent from the prior fiscal year. They closed 28,253 

cases, up 9.5 percent from FY2006. The Ninth Circuit’s share 

of the national caseload was 28.8 percent for cases opened and 

28.5 percent for cases closed, up from 26.3 for FY2006.

In Arizona, one of two border courts in the circuit, new cases 

opened in FY2007 totaled 10,121, up 24.7 percent from 

8,116 new cases the prior fiscal year. Of the new cases, 

64.4 percent were criminal in nature, many of them involving 

illegal immigration. The circuit’s other border court, the 

Southern District of California, opened 4,980 new cases, up 

14.2 percent from the 4,361 opened in FY2006.

Also reporting increases were the District of Guam, 202 cases, 

up 33.8 percent; the District of Montana, 678 cases, up 15.7 

percent; the Northern District of California with 934 cases, 

up 14.6 percent; the Western District of Washington, 2,130 

cases, up 11.9 percent; the Eastern District of Washington, 

812 cases, up 6.7 percent; the Central District of California, 

3,227 cases, up 1.5 percent; and the District of Oregon, 

1,554 cases, up 0.4 percent.

Decreases in new cases were reported by five districts. The 

largest decreases were soon in the districts of Nevada, 997 

cases, down 12.9 percent from 1,145 cases the prior fiscal 

year; Hawaii, 481 cases, down 6.8 percent from 516 cases in 

FY2006; Idaho, 300 cases, down 6.3 percent from 320 cases 

the prior fiscal year; Eastern District of California, 

1,983 cases, down 5.1 percent from 2,089 cases in 

FY2006; and Alaska, 277 cases, down 3.5 percent 

from 287 cases the prior fiscal year.

Circuit caseloads have varied over the last six years 

with increases reported in 2002, 2004, 2006, and 

2007, and decreases in 2003 and 2005.

Congress created the Office of the Federal Public 

Defender to fulfill the constitutional requirement that 

indigents charged with federal crimes be provided with, 

no-cost, professional legal representation. Congress 

funds public defender and community defender 

offices through the Defender Services Division of the 

Administrative Office of the United States Courts.

Community defender organizations are non-profit 

legal service organizations staffed by non-government 

employees, while public defender offices are federal 

agencies staffed by employees of the judiciary. Both 

types of organizations are staffed with experienced 

federal criminal law practitioners who provide a 

consistently high level of representation. 

In addition to criminal defense and appeals, public 

defenders are assigned to court-directed prisoner and 

witness representations, bail/pre-sentencing,

and probation and parole revocation hearings.

Pending and Closed Cases

The pending caseload of Ninth Circuit public and 

community defenders was 8,880 cases for FY2007,

up 4.8 percent the prior fiscal year. 

federal public defenders

 Federal Defender Organizations - Cases Opened, Closed and Pending

 Period: 12 Months Ending September 30, 2007

Fiscal Year

Cases 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Percent Change 2006-2007

Opened 23,539 24,543 23,157 25,779 28,676 11.2%

Closed 23,247 24,215 22,979 25,795 28,253 9.5%

Pending 7,944 8,287 8,460 8,471 8,880 4.8%

 

continued
54 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

Appointment and Reappointment

By statute, judges of the circuit court of appeals select 

and appoint federal public defenders to four-year terms. 

The court makes its initial appointment after a nationwide 

recruitment and the use of a local screening committee. 

A federal public defender may be reappointed if the 

court concludes that he or she is performing in a highly 

satisfactory manner based upon a broad survey and 

performance evaluation process.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 

appointed Sean Kennedy on January 16, 2007, for his 

four-year term as federal public defender for the Central 

District of California, John Gornman was reappointed on 

November 16, 2007, to a second term as federal public 

defender for the District of Guam. He has served as the 

FPD in Guam since 2003.

 Federal Defender Organizations - Summary of Representations by District

 Period: 12 Months Period Ending September 30, 2007

District

Opened

Sept. 30, 2006

Opened

Sept. 30, 2007

Change

2006-2007

Closed

Sept. 30, 2007

Pending

Sept. 30, 2007

Alaska 287 277 -3.5% 263 118

Arizona 8,116 10,121 24.7% 10,126 1,177

C. Calif. 3,180 3,227 1.5% 3,208 1,380

E. Calif. 2,089 1,983 -5.1% 2,009 819

N. Calif. 815 934 14.6% 951 375

*S. Calif. 4,361 4,980 14.2% 4,607 1,646

Guam 151 202 33.8% 193 42

Hawaii 516 481 -6.8% 460 449

*Idaho 320 300 -6.3% 303 137

*Montana 586 678 15.7% 650 281

Nevada 1,145 997 -12.9% 1,065 635

Oregon 1,548 1,554 0.4% 1,519 934

*E. Wash. 761 812 6.7% 870 282

W. Wash. 1,904 2,130 11.9% 2,029 605

Circuit Total 25,779 28,676 11.2% 28,253 8,880

National Total 97,413 99,503 2.1% 98,974 36,682

Circuit Total as % of 

National Total 26.5% 28.8% 2.4% 28.5% 24.2%

*Community Defender Organizations: In addition to handling criminal defenses and appeals, public defenders are assigned to courtdirected prisoner and witness representations, bail/pre-sentencing, and probation and parole revocation hearings. Eastern Washington and 

Idaho are combined into one organization. Northern Mariana Islands is not served by a defender organization.

 Federal Defender Organizations - Summary of Representations by District
the woRk oF the CouRts 55

Probation Offices in the Ninth Circuit prepare pre-sentence 

investigation reports on convicted offenders, and supervise 

offenders placed on probation, supervised release, parole, and 

conditional release.

As pre-sentence investigators, probation officers conduct an 

independent investigation of the offense conduct, identify applicable 

guidelines and policy statements, calculate the defendant’s offense 

level and criminal history category, report the resulting sentencing 

range, and identify factors relevant to the appropriate sentence.

In the area of supervision, probation officers establish supervision plans 

and make use of numerous programs to facilitate an offender’s successful 

supervision, and to ensure the safety of the community by monitoring 

noncompliance of offenders and reporting any violations to the proper 

authorities. In the Ninth Circuit, probation officers perform their duties 

in a variety of setting, from courthouses in large metropolitan areas to 

one-person offices in rural areas. Probation officers in the Ninth Circuit 

exemplify the highest ideals and standards in community corrections 

and are recognized nationally for delivering the highest quality services.

Offenders Under Supervision

The number of persons under post-conviction supervision in the 

Ninth Circuit increased from the prior fiscal year. At the close of fiscal 

year 2007 (ending September 30, 2007), districts reported 19,929 

persons under supervision, up 2.8 percent from 19,389 in FY2006. 

The Ninth Circuit accounted for 17.1 percent of the national total of 

116,221 persons under supervision.

Among persons under supervision in the Ninth Circuit, 4,235 were on 

probation from the courts, while 15,333 were on supervised release 

from institutions. Another 355 persons were on parole and six in the 

custody of the Bureau of Prisons.

The Central District of California with 5,609 cases and the District 

of Arizona with 3,137 cases had the most persons under supervision. 

The Southern District of California reported the 

greatest increase in supervision percentage-wise, 

up 7 percent with 1,914 cases. The District of 

Nevada followed with 1,193 cases, up 6.2 percent 

from 1,123 cases the prior fiscal year.

Nine of 15 judicial districts in the Ninth Circuit 

reported decreases in the number of persons 

under supervision. The District of the Northern 

Mariana Islands reported 39 cases, down 23.5 

percent, followed by the District of Idaho with 

407 cases, down 7.3 percent. The District of 

Oregon with 1,070 cases, was down 4.2 percent, 

while the District of Guam with 161 cases, 

declined 4.2 percent from the prior fiscal year.

Drug offenses continue to account for the majority 

of cases under supervision both in the Ninth 

Circuit and nationally. In FY2007, 7,758 persons 

were under supervision in the Ninth Circuit for 

drug violations, an increase of 3.9 percent from 

7,465 in FY2006. Drug cases accounted for 38.9 

percent of offenders under supervision in the 

circuit. The next largest category was property 

violations with 4,977 persons under supervision 

or 25 percent of the total. This category includes 

data previously reported as burglary, larceny, 

embezzlement, fraud, auto theft, forgery and 

counterfeiting, and postal laws.

Cases Revoked

For FY2007, 2,773 Ninth Circuit cases were 

revoked and closed after post-conviction 

supervision, down 1.6 percent from FY2006. 

Of the revocations, 267 were from courts and 

2,506 from institutions. Nationwide, total cases 

revoked and closed was 13,717 cases, up 1.7 

percent FY2006. The Ninth Circuit has 20.2 

percent of all cases revoked nationally.

Early Terminations

Since 2002, the Committee on Criminal Law of 

the Judicial Conference of the United States has 

encouraged officers to identify offenders who 

qualify for early termination. In general, when the 

probation offices

 Ninth Circuit Federal Probation System 

 Persons Under Post-Conviction Supervision

 Period: 12 Months Period Ending September 30, 2007

Persons Under Supervision 2006 2007 Change 2006-2007

From Courts 4,467 4,235 -5.2%

From Institutions 14,922 15,694 5.2%

Total 19,389 19,929 2.8%

 Ninth Circuit Federal Probation System 
56 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

conditions of supervision have been met and the offender 

does not pose a foreseeable risk to public safety or any 

individual third party, the probation officer may request the 

sentencing judge to consider early termination. 

During FY2007, 1,366 cases were terminated early by 

judges in the Ninth Circuit. The District of Arizona led with 

333 cases or 24.4 percent of the total early terminations. The 

Northern District of California was second with 199 cases or 

14.6 percent, followed by the Central District of California 

with 188 cases or 13.8 percent. The circuit average was 7.2 

percent, a slight increase from 6.7 percent in 2006. 

Of Note

• Supervising Probation Officer Eric Odegard and Senior 

Probation Officer Mike Pentangelo from the District of 

Alaska were selected to receive the 2007 Director’s Award 

for Extraordinary Actions for their efforts in successfully 

tracking down an offender under their supervision who fled 

the state of Alaska and had previously expressed thoughts 

of suicide. The award recognizes “judiciary employees who 

have responded in an outstanding manner to emergencies 

and other critical situations.” Senior Probation Officer 

Pentangelo has since relocated to the Northern District of 

Illinois Probation Office.

• Jonnivonn B. DeGuzman, Nam Q. Huynh, and Dzung 

B. Pham, from the U.S. Probation Office in the Central 

District of California, received the 2007 Director’s Award 

for Excellence in Court Operations (Court Technology) 

for developing a kiosk-based reporting for defendants and 

offenders’ supervising officers especially those who work 

in remote locations. This award recognizes employees for 

“developing, identifying, and/or deploying information 

management technologies and applications that meet critical 

court requirements.” 

 Ninth Circuit Federal Probation System

 Persons Under Post-Conviction Supervision by District as of September 30, 2007

From Courts Referred by Institutions

District Probation1

 Supervised

Release Parole2 BOP Custody3

2006

 Total Cases

2007

 Total Cases

Change

2006-2007

Alaska 85 217 2 0 309 304 -1.6%

Arizona 701 2,389 44 3 2,988 3,137 5.0%

C. Calif. 1,191 4,323 95 0 5,286 5,609 6.1%

E. Calif. 336 1,191 27 0 1,484 1,554 4.7%

N. Calif. 362 941 33 0 1,384 1,336 -3.5%

S. Calif. 200 1,692 22 0 1,789 1,914 7.0%

Hawaii 139 657 8 0 786 804 2.3%

Idaho 110 293 3 1 439 407 -7.3%

Montana 155 471 3 0 654 629 -3.8%

Nevada 311 821 61 0 1,123 1,193 6.2%

Oregon 230 810 30 0 1,117 1,070 -4.2%

E. Wash 55 377 2 0 449 434 -3.3%

W. Wash. 294 1,022 22 0 1,362 1,338 -1.8%

Guam 55 102 3 1 168 161 -4.2%

NMI 11 27 0 1 51 39 -23.5%

Circuit Total 4,235 15,333 355 6 19,389 19,929 2.8%

1 Includes judge and magistrate judge probation

2 Includes parole, special parole, mandatory release, and military parole.

3 BOP (Bureau of Prisons)

 Ninth Circuit Federal Probation System
the woRk oF the CouRts 57

pretrial services offices

United States pretrial services offices within the Ninth Circuit 

serve two vital roles for the courts: the provision of bail 

reports that contain important information for making 

detention and release decisions, and the monitoring and supervision of 

defendants released pending trial. In addition, pretrial services officers 

recommend eligibility for and supervision of diversion programs in 

each district.

The primary mission of pretrial services is to assist the federal courts 

in the fair administration of justice, to protect the community, and to 

bring about a long-term positive change in individuals who are under 

supervision. Offices in the Ninth Circuit continued to effectively 

achieve these goals in 2007 by working diligently to maintain very low 

levels of nonappearance and re-arrests of released defendants. This 

was accomplished by professionally trained and experienced officers 

utilizing contracted substance abuse, mental health and residential 

treatment programs, and the enhanced use of both conventional and 

state-of-the-art technology. 

Pretrial services in the Ninth Circuit ranked first nationally in case 

activations for 2007. Case activations totaled 24,326 for 2007, up 6.9 

percent from 2006. New case activations nationwide totaled 95,980, 

up 1.1 percent from the previous year. The Ninth Circuit accounted 

for 25.3 percent of the 2007 national total, up slightly from 24.3 

percent in 2006.

Pretrial services offices in 10 of 15 judicial districts reported more 

new cases in 2007 than the prior year. The Southern District of 

California, a border court with a heavy immigration caseload, saw 

an increase of 20.4 percent to 6,159 cases, compared to 5,115 cases 

the year before. Also reporting increases were the Central District of 

California, 2,542 new cases, up 18.6 percent from 8,462 activations 

in 2006, and the District of Arizona, 8,771 new cases, up 3.7 percent 

from 8,462 activations the year before. 

Decreases in total cases activated were 

reported by several districts. The District of 

Nevada had 686 new cases in 2007, down 

19.1 percent from 848 cases opened the 

previous year, followed by the District of 

Hawaii with 379 new cases, a decrease of 12.5 

percent from 433 cases opened in 2006, and 

the District of Oregon with 813 new cases 

in 2007, down 6.2 percent from 867 cases 

opened the prior year. 

Pretrial Bail Interviews, 

Supervised Defendants

The number of interviews conducted by 

officers of pretrial defendants in the circuit 

increased in 2007. Interviews numbered 

9,983, up 9.6 percent from 9,111 reports 

in 2006. Prebail written reports increased 

to 23,569 from 21,958, while postbail 

reports decreased to 494 from 591year 

before. Pretrial services officers made 

recommendations to the court in 97.4 percent 

of cases with interviews, compared to the 

national average of 91.3 percent. Detention 

was recommended in 61.1 percent of all 

cases in 2007, a decrease of 1.2 percent from 

2006. In comparison, offices of the United 

States attorneys in the circuit recommended 

detention in 63 percent of the cases, a slight 

decrease from 63.7 percent in 2006.

During 2007, a total of 5,778 defendants 

in the Ninth Circuit were released from 

custody to pretrial services supervision, down 

4.0 percent from 2006. Of these, 4,569 

were released on standard pretrial services 

supervision, a decrease of 5.8 percent from 

2006; 1,027 were supervised on a courtesy 

basis from another district or circuit, up 1.8 

percent; and 182 were on pretrial diversion 

caseloads, an increase of 13 percent.

 Ninth Circuit Pretrial Services - Cases Activated 

 Period: 12 Months Period Ending September 30, 2007

Caseload Measure 2006 2007 Change 2006-2007

*Reports 22,549 23,569 4.5%

Interviews 9,111 9,983 9.6%

Cases Activated 22,750 24,326 6.9%

*Includes prebail reports with and without recommendation, and includes types 

of reports categorized in previous periods as “other reports.”

 Ninth Circuit Pretrial Services - Cases Activated 

continued
58 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

Nonappearance and Re-Arrest Rates Remain Low

While pretrial service officers continuously look for 

ways to reduce unnecessary detentions, the rate of bail 

revocations due to nonappearance and/or re-arrest of 

supervised defendants continued to be significantly low. 

In 2007, the rate of nonappearance in the circuit was just 

0.5 percent. In 2007, the 15 district courts of the Ninth 

Circuit revoked the bail of 240 defendants who absconded 

from supervision.

Violations

In 2007, cases in release status numbered 15,676. Of 

these, 1,726 cases had violations reported to the court. 

They included 73 violations for felony re-arrest, 76 for 

misdemeanor re-arrest, 95 for other re-arrest violations, 

and 80 for failure to appear. Technical violations, which 

include positive urine screens, violation of electronic 

monitoring conditions, possession of contraband, and 

failure to report to officer, accounted for the remainder 

of the 1,228 reported violations.

 Pretrial Workload Chart

 Period:12 Months Ending September 20, 2007

Defendant Contact Written Reports

District Interviewed

*Not

 Interviewed **Prebail

Postbail

& Other

No 

Reports 

Made

Total Cases

Activated 

2006

Total Cases

Activated 

2007

Change

2006-2007

Alaska 82 137 216 0 3 200 219 9.5%

Arizona 1,330 7,441 8,736 22 13 8,462 8,771 3.7%

C. Calif. 1,553 989 2,536 6 0 2,143 2,542 18.6%

E. Calif. 497 633 1,111 18 1 1,118 1,130 1.1%

N. Calif. 359 509 545 319 4 906 868 -4.2%

S. Calif. 3,788 2,371 6,092 58 9 5,115 6,159 20.4%

Hawaii 309 70 379 0 0 433 379 -12.5%

Idaho 349 10 351 0 8 290 359 23.8%

Montana 255 271 510 5 11 496 526 6.0%

Nevada 377 309 683 3 0 848 686 -19.1%

Oregon 293 520 801 1 11 867 813 -6.2%

E. Wash 189 273 237 41 184 453 462 2.0%

W. Wash. 475 785 1,229 18 13 1,303 1,260 -3.3%

Guam 100 25 116 3 6 93 125 34.4%

NMI 27 0 27 0 0 23 27 17.4%

Circuit 

Total 9,983 14,343 23,569 494 263 22,750 24,326 6.9%

National 

Total 64,232 31,748 89,202 4,312 2,466 94,978 95,980 1.1%

Circuit 

% of

National 15.5% 45.2% 26.4% 11.5% 10.7% 24.0% 25.3% 1.4%

*Includes cases in which interviews were refused, includes defendants not available for interview, and transfer-received cases in which 

defendants were interviewed in other districts.

**Includes prebail reports with and without recommendation, and includes types of reports categorized in previous periods as “other 

reports.”

 Pretrial Workload Chart
District Caseloads

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Montana

Alaska

Hawaii

Western 

Washington

Eastern

Washington

Idaho

Nevada

Oregon

Northern

California

Central

California

Southern

California

Eastern

California

Arizona

Guam

N. Mariana 

Islands

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Ninth Circuit
60 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

 District of Alaska

Caseload Measure

 

2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship 

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 525 522 -0.6% 174

 Terminations 526 502 -4.6% 167 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 542 562 3.7% 187 District 3

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 2

 Filings 622 697 12.1% 349 Magistrate

 Terminations 1,607 780 -51.5% 390 Full time 2

 *Pending 1,165 1,082 -7.1% 541 Part-time 4

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Anchorage, Fairbanks, 

Juneau, Ketchikan, Nome

 District of Arizona

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship 

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 7,396 7,656 3.5% 589

 Terminations 9,231 8,258 -10.5% 635 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 6,234 5,632 -9.7% 433 **District 13

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 7

 Filings 7,793 10,920 40.1% 1,560 Magistrate

 Terminations 25,445 13,576 -46.6% 1,939 Full time 12

 *Pending 20,426 17,769 -13.0% 2,538 Part-time 0

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

**Includes one authorized temporary judgeship.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Flagstaff, Phoenix, 

Prescott, Tucson, Yuma

district caseloads

 District of Alaska 17

 District of Arizona 18
the woRk oF the CouRts 61

 Central District of California

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship 

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 12,470 13,617 9.2% 486

 Terminations 12,791 12,900 0.9% 461 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 11,617 12,334 6.2% 441 **District 28

Bankruptcy Court ***Bankruptcy 24

 Filings 17,802 34,028 91.1% 1,418 Magistrate

 Terminations 60,618 29,330 -51.6% 1,222 Full time 23

 *Pending 21,311 26,009 22.0% 1,084 Part-time 1

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

**Includes one authorized temporary judgeship.

***Includes three authorized temporary judgeships.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Los Angeles, Riverside, 

Santa Ana

 Eastern District of California

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 5,707 5,420 -5.0% 903

 Terminations 4,897 4,948 1.0% 825 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 7,569 8,041 6.2% 1,340 District 6

Bankruptcy Court **Bankruptcy 7

 Filings 9,323 18,052 93.6% 2,579 Magistrate

 Terminations 31,273 15,130 -51.6% 2,161 Full time 10

 *Pending 13,452 16,374 21.7% 2,339 Part-time 0

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

**Includes one authorized temporary judgeship.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Bakersfield, Fresno, 

Redding, Sacramento, 

South Lake Tahoe, Yosemite

 Central District of California 19

 Eastern District of California 20
62 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

 Northern District of California

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship 

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 8,784 7,404 -15.7% 529

 Terminations 6,828 6,633 -2.9% 474 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 8,488 9,259 9.1% 661 District 14

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 9

 Filings 7,742 12,599 62.7% 1,400 Magistrate

 Terminations 17,402 11,264 -35.3% 1,252 Full time 10

 *Pending 17,024 18,359 7.8% 2,040 Part-time 1

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Eureka, Oakland, 

Salinas, San Francisco, 

San Jose, Santa Rosa

 Southern District of California

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 5,777 6,197 7.3% 477

 Terminations 5,440 6,673 22.7% 513 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 4,505 4,029 -10.6% 310 District 13

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 4

 Filings 4,338 7,936 82.9% 1,984 Magistrate

 Terminations 9,563 7,089 -25.9% 1,772 Full time 10

 *Pending 5,507 6,354 15.4% 1,589 Part-time 0

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

Authorized places of holding 

court: El Centro, San Diego

district caseloads

 Northern District of California 21

 Southern District of California 22
the woRk oF the CouRts 63

 District of Guam

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 168 152 -9.5% 152

 Terminations 115 139 20.9% 139 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 153 166 8.5% 166 District 1

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 0

 Filings 114 133 16.7% 385 Magistrate

 Terminations 251 207 -17.5% 271 Full time 1

 Pending 190 116 -38.9% 327 Part-time 0

The Guam district judge also handles all bankruptcy cases.

*Total pending cases revised for 2006

Authorized places of holding 

court: Hagatna

 District of Hawaii

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 1,041 1,067 2.5% 267

 Terminations 1,146 1,217 6.2% 304 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 1,189 1,039 -12.6% 260 **District 4

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 1

 Filings 965 1,386 43.6% 1,386 Magistrate

 Terminations 2,809 1,539 -45.2% 1,539 Full time 3

 *Pending 1,448 1,295 -10.6% 1,295 Part-time 1

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

**Includes one authorized temporary judgeship.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Honolulu

 District of Guam 23

 District of Hawaii 24
64 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

 District of Idaho

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 760 811 6.7% 406

 Terminations 809 837 3.5% 419 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 849 823 -3.1% 412 District 2

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 2

 Filings 2,931 3,838 30.9% 1,919 Magistrate

 Terminations 7,809 4,855 -37.8% 2,428 Full time 2

 *Pending 5,830 4,813 -17.4% 2,407 Part-time 0

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Boise, Coeur d’Alene, 

Moscow, Pocatello

 District of Montana

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 1,022 1,056 3.3% 352

 Terminations 1,137 1,101 -3.2% 367 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 1,168 1,123 -3.9% 374 District 3

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 1

 Filings 1,845 1,879 1.8% 1,879 Magistrate

 Terminations 3,381 2,406 -28.8% 2,406 Full time 3

 *Pending 3,635 3,108 -14.5% 3,108 Part-time 1

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Billings, Butte, Great 

Falls, Helena, Missoula

district caseloads

 District of Montana 26

 District of Idaho 25
the woRk oF the CouRts 65

 District of Nevada

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 2,840 2,836 -0.1% 405

 Terminations 2,588 2,845 9.9% 406 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 3,445 3,436 -0.3% 491 District 7

Bankruptcy Court **Bankruptcy 4

 Filings 5,517 10,953 98.5% 2,738 Magistrate

 Terminations 16,226 12,017 -25.9% 3,004 Full time 6

 *Pending 16,435 15,371 -6.5% 3,843 Part-time 0

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

**Includes one authorized temporary judgeship.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Carson City, Elko, Ely, 

Las Vegas, Lovelock, Reno

 District of Northern Mariana Islands

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 68 61 -10.3% 61

 Terminations 59 77 30.5% 77 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 75 59 -21.3% 59 District 1

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 0

 Filings 17 17 0.0% 32 Magistrate

 Terminations 38 24 -36.8% 12 Full time 0

 *Pending 28 21 -25.0% 49 Part-time 0

The Northern Mariana Islands district judge also handles all bankruptcy cases.

*Total pending cases revised for 2006

Authorized places of holding 

court: Saipan

 District of Nevada 27

 District of Northern Mariana Islands 28
66 AnnuAl RepoRt 2007

 District of Oregon

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 3,104 3,140 1.2% 523

 Terminations 3,175 3,080 -3.0% 513 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 3,104 3,221 3.8% 537 District 6

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 5

 Filings 7,585 9,386 23.7% 1,877 Magistrate

 Terminations 18,904 10,940 -42.1% 2,188 Full time 6

 *Pending 15,300 13,746 -10.2% 2,749 Part-time 1

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Coquille, Eugene, 

Klamath Falls, Medford, 

Pendleton, Portland

 Eastern District of Washington

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 1,016 1,002 -1.4% 251

 Terminations 1,111 945 -14.9% 236 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 816 873 7.0% 218 District 4

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 2

 Filings 3,463 4,344 25.4% 2,172 Magistrate

 Terminations 7,269 4,990 -31.4% 2,495 Full time 2

 *Pending 5,968 5,322 -10.8% 2,661 Part-time 0

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Richland, Spokane, 

Walla Walla, Yakima

district caseloads

 Eastern District of Washington 30

 District of Oregon 29
the woRk oF the CouRts 67

 Western District of Washington

Caseload Measure 2006 2007

Change

2006-2007

Per Judgeship

Unweighted 2007

District Court

 Filings 3,753 4,152 10.6% 593

 Terminations 4,281 4,138 -3.3% 591 Authorized Judgeships

 *Pending 3,591 3,605 0.4% 515 District 7

Bankruptcy Court Bankruptcy 5

 Filings 8,448 11,224 32.9% 2,245 Magistrate

 Terminations 20,819 11,566 -44.4% 2,313 Full time 5

 *Pending 14,362 14,020 -2.4% 2,804 Part-time 2

*Total pending cases revised for 2006.

Authorized places of holding 

court: Bellingham, Seattle, 

Tacoma

 Western District of Washington 31