Federal Judicial Center
        
              
        Search tips
Search

          HomeAbout the FJCStatuteThe FJC and What It DoesAnnual ReportsBoard MembersSenior StaffJob VacanciesContact UsResearch About the CourtsReports & StudiesManuals, Monographs & GuidesResearch ProjectsCardone Recommendation StudyFederal Rules MaterialsFederal Court Cases: FJC Integrated Database (IDB)Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990OverviewDocumentsPublicationsLegislationSpecial Topics1980 Hague Convention on International Child Abduction: A Resource for JudgesOverviewRecent CasesSources of Law and InterpretationCase CommentariesSample OrdersArticles and CommentaryFAQsVideo TutorialsChecklistCovid-19 and the Federal Judiciary: Research ResourcesOverviewMaps and DashboardsResearch ReportsTopical WebpagesElection LitigationOverviewCase Studies in Emergency Election LitigationLitigation SubjectsRegistration ProceduresNullifying RegistrationsDistrict LinesFilling VacanciesGetting on the BallotRecall ElectionsBallot MeasuresCampaign ActivitiesElection DatesAbsentee and Early VotingVoter IdentificationPoll HoursVoting ProceduresPolling Place ActivitiesProvisional BallotsVoting IrregularitiesRecountsInteractive Map of Emergency Election CasesFJC Publications on Election LitigationElection Law BibliographyCovid-19Federal and State Court CooperationOverviewTopics for Cooperation Between State and Federal CourtsReducing BiasWhat Is Bias and How Is It Measured?Effectiveness of Implicit Bias TrainingsReducing Bias ReferencesBankruptcy EducationState–Federal Judicial CouncilsExamples of State–Federal Court CooperationSample FormsAdditional ResourcesIllustrative Forms of Class Action NoticesOverviewSecurities NoticesProducts Liability NoticesEmployment Discrimination NoticesNotice Checklist and Plain Language GuideNotes for Use by Attorneys and JudgesOverview of MethodologyDetailed Discussion of MethodologyAcknowledgmentsManaging Capital CasesOverviewManaging Federal Death Penalty TrialsIntroductionResource Guide, Volume IOrders and FormsFederal Death Penalty Resource Counsel AssistanceManaging Habeas Corpus Review of Capital ConvictionsResource Guide, Volume IICapital Defense Network AssistanceAdditional ResourcesNational Security CasesOverviewPublicationsSelected Orders and Other Case DocumentsRelated FJC ResourcesForeign Intelligence Surveillance CourtRules of Practice and ProcedureOverviewVideo TutorialsGuidesResearch ReportsPrint PublicationsOnline-Only Research ReportsScience ResourcesOverviewFingerprint IdentificationNeuroscienceOpioids CrisisDNA TechnologiesWater and the LawTechnology in LitigationOverviewPublicationsThird-Party Litigation FinancingOverviewPublications and ReportsLocal Rules and FormsState LawsIndustry StandardsEducation for the CourtsEducation ProgramsPrograms and Resources for JudgesPrograms and Resources for Court AttorneysPrograms and Resources for Federal DefendersPrograms and Resources for ExecutivesPrograms and Resources for Supervisors and ManagersPrograms and Resources for Experienced Probation and Pretrial Services OfficersPrograms and Resources for All Court EmployeesPrograms and Resources for TrainersCivic Education About the CourtsTalking Points on Judicial HistoryFamous Federal TrialsState and Federal CourtsInside the Federal CourtsManuals, Monographs, & GuidesVideos & PodcastsHistory of the Federal JudiciaryJudgesBiographical Directory of Article III Federal JudgesBankruptcy JudgeshipsMagistrate JudgeshipsDiversity on the BenchJudicial SalariesUnsuccessful Nominations and Recess AppointmentsImpeachments of Federal JudgesJudgeship ReassignmentsCourtsSupreme Court of the United StatesU.S. Courts of AppealsU.S. District CourtsU.S. Circuit Courts, 1789-1911Other Federal CourtsCourts: A Brief OverviewWork of the CourtsCaseloadsThe Contempt Power of the Federal CourtsJurisdictionThe Role of the U.S. Courts of Appeals in the Federal JudiciaryRulesJudicial BranchAdministrative BodiesCongress and the CourtsExecutive Branch and the CourtsCourt Officers and StaffFederal Judicial CircuitsTalking Points on Federal Judicial HistoryCourthousesGalleryDetailed ListList by StateCasesCases that Shaped the Federal CourtsFamous Federal TrialsExhibitsTimelinesGraphs: DemographicsGraphs: CaseloadsMapsNotable Federal TrialsSnapshots of Federal Judicial History, 1790-1990Spotlight on Judicial HistoryThe Justices' Circuit Court OpinionsFor Further StudyCourt History ProgramsGuide to ResearchJudges' Published PapersOral History ResourcesPublished Court HistoriesScholarship on JudgesInternational OfficeAbout IOHistoryInternational ProgramsGlobal ReachBriefing MaterialsTranslated MaterialsContact UsPublications Catalog You are here HomeResearch About the Courts  Materials About the Federal Rules The materials listed below, produced or made available by the Center, are related to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure (appellate, bankruptcy, civil, criminal, and evidence). Click here for curated content on Rules of Practice and Procedure. Reports and Studies.
 Title
          Description
                        
                  Will return exact match for word(s) entered
 Title
                  Rule(s)
                  Datesort ascendingAmendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure 2016—Transmittal to CongressThis package of materials was transmitted to Congress on April 28, 2016, concerning amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure to become effective on December 1, 2016.
Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure are as follows:
Amendments to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4, 5, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28, 28.1, 29, 32, 35, and 40, and Forms 1, 5, and 6, and adoption of new Form 7 and a new Appendix.
Amendments to Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 1010, 1011, 2002, 3002.1, 7008, 7012, 7016, 9006, 9027, and 9033, and adoption of new Rule 1012.
Amendments to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4, 6, and 82.
Amendments to Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 4, 41, and 45.Additional information about these amendments is available on the Federal Judicial Center’s website at Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure (webpage).
Information about rules amendments and the rule-making process is available on uscourts.gov at United States Courts Rules & Policies.
              Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Fed. R. App. P. 1, Fed. R. App. P. 21, Fed. R. App. P. 25, Fed. R. App. P. 26, Fed. R. App. P. 27, Fed. R. App. P. 28, Fed. R. App. P. 28.1, Fed. R. App. P. 29, Fed. R. App. P. 32, Fed. R. App. P. 35, Fed. R. App. P. 4, Fed. R. App. P. 40, Fed. R. App. P. 5, Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 1010, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 1011, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 1012, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2002, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3002.1, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7008, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7012, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7016, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9027, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9033, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 4, Fed. R. Civil P. 6, Fed. R. Civil P. 82, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Fed. R. Crim. P. 4, Fed. R. Crim. P. 41, Fed. R. Crim. P. 45
              April 28, 2016Case Commentary: West v. Dobrev, 735 F.3d 921 (10th Cir. 2013)**Summary Judgment | Sua Sponte Orders**
This case touches on motions for summary judg­ment in connection with Hague Convention cases. Because of the emphasis on expedited proceedings, many courts have used summary judgment procedures to eliminate unmeritorious cases and narrow issues to those where there is a real and material dispute. Rule 56 sets out con­siderations and procedures for summary judgments, and provides that a court may grant a summary judgment where there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
**Facts**
Mother petitioned the district court for the return of her two children to Belgium; they were being retained in Utah by their father after the conclusion of their vacation with him. The district court held a preliminary hearing six days after the petition was filed, during which time the parties provided documentation to support their claims. Mother presented evidence that established a prima facie case for the return of the children—that the children’s habitual residence was Belgium, that she had enforceable custody rights, and that father had wrongfully retained the children. Father asserted an Article 13(b) defense that the children would be exposed to a grave risk if returned to Belgium, but he had no actual evidence that he could present that such a grave risk existed. What father really wanted was additional time to be able to investigate whether there was abuse. Based upon the oral and written submissions of the parties, the district court issued a brief written decision granting mother’s petition and ordered the children returned to Belgium.
**Discussion**
*Summary Judgment Procedure.*The Tenth Circuit recognized that Article 11 of the Convention exhorts court to act expeditiously to determine petitions made for return of children. The court noted that a district court has a great deal of discretion to determine the procedures necessary to resolve a Hague case. Quoting *March v. Levine*,[1] the court observed that neither the Convention, nor ICARA, nor any constitutional provisions require that an evidentiary hearing or discovery be allowed, as a matter of right, in Hague Convention proceedings. In this case, mother had easily made out a prima facie case for return, and father was unable to provide any credible evidence that supported his claim of a grave risk under Article 13. At most, his submissions amounted to a “fishing expedition.” Rejecting father’s claims that he had been denied due process by the lack of an evidentiary hearing, the court held that the father had a meaningful opportunity to be heard and no denial of due process occurred.
[1]. 249 F.3d 462, 474 (6th Cir. 2001).
This document is part of The 1980 Hague Convention on International Child Abduction: A Resource for Judges, a Special Topic Webpage.
              Fed. R. Civil P. 56
              March 5, 2016Review of Scientific Literature on the Reliability of Present Sense Impressions and Excited UtterancesThis review of scientific literature regarding the reliability of present sense impressions and excited utterances as it pertains to the Federal Rules of Evidence was presented as a memorandum to the Advisory Committee on Rules of Evidence.
              Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence, Fed. R. Evid. 803
              March 5, 2016Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 2015—PowerPoint PresentationJudge Paul W. Grimm, District of Maryland, developed the attached PowerPoint presentation describing the 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The amendments reformed discovery rules to maximize efficiency, including cost containment, and were not intended to deprive parties in civil litigation of proof or defense.
Additional information is available on the Federal Judicial Center’s website at Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure (webpage).
              Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 1, Fed. R. Civil P. 16, Fed. R. Civil P. 26, Fed. R. Civil P. 34
              January 29, 2016Civil Rules Amendments 2015 Comparison Chart Prepared by the District of MarylandThis comparison chart was prepared by the District of Maryland to show 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Additional information about rules amendments is available on the Federal Judicial Center’s website at Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure (webpage).
Information about rules amendments and the rule-making process is available on uscourts.gov at United States Courts Rules & Policies.
              Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
              December 1, 2015Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure: Civil Rules 2015
**Video Series:** The amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that became effective on December 1, 2015, reformed discovery rules for the sake of efficiency, including cost containment. The amendments are not intended to deprive parties in civil litigation of proof or defense.
The first video in this series of five short videos provides an overview of the amendments. The other four videos address the four primary themes of the amendments. Also posted on this website is text of Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure.
Discussion of these amendments is the principal topic of The Chief Justice's 2015 Year-End Report.
**Overview**
Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which became effective on December 1, 2015, foster more cost-effective discovery through cooperation, proportionality, early and active case management, and considerations of electronically stored information (ESI). This video is an overview of amendments to Rules 1, 16, 26, 34, and 37.
**Cooperation**
An amendment to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1, which became effective on December 1, 2015, resulted from a finding that civil litigation is resolved more quickly and less expensively when parties and lawyers cooperate. The amendment makes explicit that the rules "should be construed, administered, and employed by the court and the parties to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding."
**Proportional Discovery**
This video describes amendments to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1), 26(c)(1)(B), 26(d), and 34 that became effective on December 1. Amendments to Rule 26(b)(1) are designed to promote proportional discovery: discovery tailored by the judge and the parties to meet the reasonable needs of the case. Proportional discovery provides the information needed by the litigants to prove their cases, but avoids excess and waste. Judges are encouraged to engage in a dialogue with the parties regarding the amount of discovery reasonably needed to resolve the litigation. This video also describes amended Rule 26(c)(1)(B) on cost shifting, an amendment to Rule 26(d) on document production, and changes to Rule 34 on objections to document production requests.
**Early and Active Case Management**
Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that became effective on December 1, 2015, respond to findings that early intervention by judges helps to narrow issues and reduce discovery. Litigation results are more satisfactory when a judge actively manages a case from the beginning and stays involved. The amendments do not break new ground; they emphasize the importance of early, hands-on, and continuing case management. The times for service of a complaint and the time for holding an initial case-management conference are reduced. The rules now recognize that live conferences are almost always the most effective way to identify the needs of a case and issue orders tailored to efficient resolution. Discovery disputes should be addressed by discussion before motion. The amendments also concern preservation of electronically stored information (ESI) and Federal Rule of Evidence 502's protections against inadvertent waiver of the attorney–client privilege and work-product protections.
**Failure to Preserve Electronically Stored Information**
Amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e), which became effective on December 1, 2015, specify that sanctions for failure to preserve electronically stored information (ESI) require findings that (1) the ESI should have been preserved in the anticipation of litigation, (2) the party failed to take reasonable steps to preserve it, and (3) it cannot be restored or replaced through additional discovery. The rule does not create a duty to preserve ESI. Instead, it leaves in place the common-law duty.
              Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 1, Fed. R. Civil P. 16, Fed. R. Civil P. 26, Fed. R. Civil P. 34, Fed. R. Civil P. 37, Fed. R. Evid. 502
              December 1, 2015Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure 2015—Civil Rules RedlineAmendments to the following Federal Rules of Civil Procedure became effective on December 1, 2015: 1, 4, 16, 26, 30, 31, 33, 34, 37, and 55. Rule 84 and the Appendix of Forms were abrogated.
Additional information about these amendments is available at FJC.gov:
Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure: Civil Rules 2015 (video tutorials)
Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure 2015—Transmittal to Congress (document)
Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure (webpage)Information about rules amendments and the rule-making process is available on uscourts.gov at United States Courts Rules & Policies.
              Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 1, Fed. R. Civil P. 16, Fed. R. Civil P. 26, Fed. R. Civil P. 30, Fed. R. Civil P. 31, Fed. R. Civil P. 33, Fed. R. Civil P. 34, Fed. R. Civil P. 37, Fed. R. Civil P. 4, Fed. R. Civil P. 55, Fed. R. Civil P. 84
              December 1, 2015Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure: Civil Rules 2015—Failure to Preserve Electronically Stored InformationAmendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e), which became effective on December 1, 2015, specify that sanctions for failure to preserve electronically stored information (ESI) require findings that (1) the ESI should have been preserved in the anticipation of litigation, (2) the party failed to take reasonable steps to preserve it, and (3) it cannot be restored or replaced through additional discovery. The rule does not create a duty to preserve ESI. Instead, it leaves in place the common-law duty.
The following videos also relate to Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure: Civil Rules 2015:
Overview
Cooperation
Proportional Discovery
Early and Active Case ManagementAlso posted at this website is text of Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure.
              Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 37
              December 1, 2015Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure: Civil Rules 2015—Early and Active Case ManagementAmendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that became effective on December 1, 2015, respond to findings that early intervention by judges helps to narrow issues and reduce discovery. Litigation results are more satisfactory when a judge actively manages a case from the beginning and stays involved. The amendments do not break new ground; they emphasize the importance of early, hands-on, and continuing case management. The times for service of a complaint and the time for holding an initial case-management conference are reduced. The rules now recognize that live conferences are almost always the most effective way to identify the needs of a case and issue orders tailored to efficient resolution. Discovery disputes should be addressed by discussion before motion. The amendments also concern preservation of electronically stored information (ESI) and Federal Rule of Evidence 502's protections against inadvertent waiver of the attorney–client privilege and work-product protections.
The following videos also relate to Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure: Civil Rules 2015:
Overview
Cooperation
Proportional Discovery
Failure to Preserve Electronically Stored InformationAlso posted at this website is text of Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure.
              Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence, Fed. R. Evid. 502
              December 1, 2015Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure: Civil Rules 2015—Proportional DiscoveryThis video describes amendments to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1), 26(c)(1)(B), 26(d), and 34 that became effective on December 1.
Amendments to Rule 26(b)(1) are designed to promote proportional discovery: discovery tailored by the judge and the parties to meet the reasonable needs of the case. Proportional discovery provides the information needed by the litigants to prove their cases, but avoids excess and waste. Judges are encouraged to engage in a dialogue with the parties regarding the amount of discovery reasonably needed to resolve the litigation.
This video also describes amended Rule 26(c)(1)(B) on cost shifting, an amendment to Rule 26(d) on document production, and changes to Rule 34 on objections to document production requests.
The following videos also relate to Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure: Civil Rules 2015:
Overview
Cooperation
Early and Active Case Management
Failure to Preserve Electronically Stored InformationAlso posted at this website is text of Amendments to the Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure.
              Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Fed. R. Civil P. 26, Fed. R. Civil P. 34
              December 1, 2015
 Pages « first
‹ previous
...
4
5
6
7
8
9
...
next ›
last »
 Share Share this page
Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building
One Columbus Circle NE
Washington, DC 20002-8003
202-502-4000

Supreme Court of the United States  USCourts.gov  U.S. Sentencing Commission  Federal Judicial Center Foundation

*This website is produced and published at U.S. taxpayer expense.*

The Federal Judicial Center produced and maintains this site in furtherance of its statutory mission. The Center regards the contents of this site to be responsible and valuable, but these contents do not reflect official policy or recommendation of the Board of the Federal Judicial Center. The site also contains links to relevant information on websites maintained by other organizations; providing these external links is for the convenience of this site's users and does not constitute verification or endorsement of the information or the sites to which the links are produced. Opinions expressed in the materials found on this site are those of the authors, and not necessarily those of the Federal Judicial Center.
Site Map | Contact Webmaster | Privacy and Security Notice