IB
Union Calendar No. 275
105TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 1252
[Report No. 105–478]
To modify the procedures of the Federal courts in certain matters, and
for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
APRIL 9, 1997
Mr. HYDE (for himself, Mr. COBLE, Mr. CANADY of Florida, Mr. BONO, Mr.
BRYANT, and Mr. GOODLATTE) introduced the following bill; which was
referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
APRIL 1, 1998
Additional sponsors: Mr. MANZULLO, Mr. RIGGS, and Mr. SENSENBRENNER
APRIL 1, 1998
Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed
[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic]
[For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on April 9, 1997]
A BILL
To modify the procedures of the Federal courts in certain
matters, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Judicial Reform Act
of 1998’’.
SEC. 2. 3-JUDGE COURT FOR ANTICIPATORY RELIEF.
(a) REQUIREMENT OF 3-JUDGE COURT.—Any appli-
cation for anticipatory relief against the enforcement, oper-
ation, or execution of a State law adopted by referendum
shall not be granted by a United States district court or
judge thereof upon the ground that the State law is repug-
nant to the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United
States unless the application for anticipatory relief is heard
and determined by a court of 3 judges in accordance with
section 2284 of title 28, United States Code. Any appeal
of a determination on such application shall be to the Su-
preme Court. In any case to which this section applies, the
additional judges who will serve on the 3-judge court shall
be designated under section 2284(b)(1) of title 28, United
States Code, as soon as practicable, and the court shall ex-
pedite the consideration of the application for anticipatory
relief.
(b) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section—
(1) the term ‘‘State’’ means each of the several
States and the District of Columbia;
(2) the term ‘‘State law’’ means the constitution
of a State, or any statute, rule, regulation, or other
measure of a State that has the force of law, and any
amendment thereto;
(3) the term ‘‘referendum’’ means the submission
to popular vote, by the voters of the State, of a meas-
ure passed upon or proposed by a legislative body or
by popular initiative; and
(4) the term ‘‘anticipatory relief’’ means an in-
terlocutory or permanent injunction or a declaratory
judgment.
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section applies to any ap-
plication for anticipatory relief that is filed on or after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 3. INTERLOCUTORY APPEALS OF COURT ORDERS RE-
LATING TO CLASS ACTIONS.
(a) INTERLOCUTORY APPEALS.—Section 1292(b) of
title 28, United States Code, is amended—
(1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘(b)’’; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(2) A party to an action in which the district court
has made a determination of whether the action may be
maintained as a class action may make application for ap-
peal of that determination to the court of appeals which
would have jurisdiction of an appeal of that action. The
court of appeals may, in its discretion, permit the appeal
to be taken from such determination if the application is
made within 10 days after the entry of the court’s deter-
mination relating to the class action. Application for an
appeal under this paragraph shall not stay proceedings in
the district court unless the district judge or the court of
appeals or a judge thereof shall so order.’’.
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by sub-
section (a) applies to any action commenced on or after
the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 4. PROCEEDINGS ON COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUDICIAL
CONDUCT.
(a) REFERRAL OF PROCEEDINGS TO ANOTHER JUDI-
CIAL CIRCUIT
OR COURT.—Section 372(c) of title 28,
United States Code, is amended—
(1) in paragraph (1) by adding at the end the
following: ‘‘In the case of a complaint so identified,
the chief judge shall notify the clerk of the court of ap-
peals of the complaint, together with a brief statement
of the facts underlying the complaint.’’;
(2) in paragraph (2) in the second sentence by
inserting ‘‘or statement of facts underlying the com-
plaint (as the case may be)’’ after ‘‘copy of the com-
plaint’’;
(3) in paragraph (3)—
(A) by inserting ‘‘(A)’’ after ‘‘(3)’’;
(B) by striking ‘‘may—’’ and all that fol-
lows through the end of subparagraph (B) and
inserting the following: ‘‘may dismiss the com-
plaint if the chief judge finds it to be—
‘‘(i) not in conformity with paragraph (1);
‘‘(ii) directly related to the merits of a decision
or procedural ruling; or
‘‘(iii) frivolous.’’; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(B) If the chief judge does not enter an order under
subparagraph (A), then the complaint or (in the case of a
complaint identified under paragraph (1)) the statement of
facts underlying the complaint shall be referred to the chief
judge of another judicial circuit for proceedings under this
subsection (hereafter in this subsection referred to as the
‘chief judge’), in accordance with a system established by
rule by the Judicial Conference, which prescribes the cir-
cuits to which the complaints will be referred. The Judicial
Conference shall establish and submit to the Congress the
system described in the preceding sentence not later than
180 days after the date of the enactment of the Judicial
Reform Act of 1998.
‘‘(C) After expeditiously reviewing the complaint, the
chief judge may, by written order explaining the chief
judge’s reasons, conclude the proceeding if the chief judge
finds that appropriate corrective action has been taken or
that action on the complaint is no longer necessary because
of intervening events.’’;
(4) in paragraph (4)—
(A) by striking ‘‘paragraph (3)’’ and insert-
ing ‘‘paragraph (3)(C)’’; and
(B) in subparagraph (A) by inserting ‘‘(to
which the complaint or statement of facts under-
lying the complaint is referred)’’ after ‘‘the cir-
cuit’’;
(5) in paragraph (5)—
(A) in the first sentence by inserting ‘‘to
which the complaint or statement of facts under-
lying the complaint is referred’’ after ‘‘the cir-
cuit’’; and
(B) in the second sentence by striking ‘‘the
circuit’’ and inserting ‘‘that circuit’’;
(6) in the first sentence of paragraph (15) by in-
serting before the period at the end the following: ‘‘in
which the complaint was filed or identified under
paragraph (1)’’; and
(7) by amending paragraph (18) to read as fol-
lows:
‘‘(18) The Judicial Conference shall prescribe rules,
consistent with the preceding provisions of this subsection—
within or under the control the United States for a
civil or criminal law enforcement activity authorized
by law.’’.
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by sub-
section (a) apply to complaints filed on or after the 180th
day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 5. LIMITATION ON COURT-IMPOSED TAXES.
(a) LIMITATION.—Chapter 85 of title 28, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
‘‘§ 1369. Limitation on Federal court remedies
‘‘(a) LIMITATION ON COURT-IMPOSED TAXES.—(1) No
district court may enter any order or approve any settle-
ment that requires any State, or political subdivision of a
State, to impose, increase, levy, or assess any tax, unless
the court finds by clear and convincing evidence, that—
‘‘(A) there are no other means available to rem-
edy the deprivation of a right under the Constitution
of the United States;
‘‘(B) the proposed imposition, increase, levying,
or assessment is narrowly tailored to remedy the spe-
cific deprivation at issue so that the remedy imposed
is directly related to the harm caused by the depriva-
tion;
‘‘(C) the tax will not contribute to or exacerbate
the deprivation intended to be remedied;
‘‘(D) plans submitted to the court by State and
local authorities will not effectively redress the depri-
vations at issue;
‘‘(E) the interests of State and local authorities
in managing their affairs are not usurped, in viola-
tion of the Constitution, by the proposed imposition,
increase, levying, or assessment; and
‘‘(F) the proposed tax will not result in the loss
or depreciation of property values of the taxpayers
who are affected.
‘‘(2) The limitation contained in paragraph (1) shall
apply only to any order or settlement which—
‘‘(A) expressly directs any State, or political sub-
division of a State, to impose, increase, levy, or assess
any tax; or
‘‘(B) will necessarily require a State, or political
subdivision of a State, to impose, increase, levy, or
assess any tax.
‘‘(3) If the court finds that the conditions set forth in
paragraph (1) have been satisfied, it shall enter an order
incorporating that finding, and that order shall be subject
to immediate interlocutory de novo review.
‘‘(4) A remedy permitted under paragraph (1) shall
not extend beyond the case or controversy before the court.
‘‘(5)(A) Notwithstanding any law or rule of procedure,
any person or entity whose tax liability would be directly
affected by the imposition of a tax under paragraph (1)
shall have the right to intervene in any proceeding concern-
ing the imposition of the tax, except that the court may
deny intervention if it finds that the interest of that person
or entity is adequately represented by existing parties.
‘‘(B) A person or entity that intervenes pursuant to
subparagraph (A) shall have the right to—
‘‘(i) present evidence and appear before the court
to present oral and written testimony; and
‘‘(ii) appeal any finding required to be made by
this section, or any other related action taken to im-
pose, increase, levy, or assess the tax that is the sub-
ject of the intervention.
‘‘(b) TERMINATION
OF
ORDERS.—Notwithstanding
any law or rule of procedure, any order of, or settlement
approved by, a district court requiring the imposition, in-
crease, levy, or assessment of a tax pursuant to subsection
(a)(1) shall automatically terminate or expire on the date
that is—
‘‘(1) 1 year after the date of the imposition of the
tax; or
‘‘(2) an earlier date, if the court determines that
the deprivation of rights that is addressed by the
order or settlement has been cured to the extent prac-
ticable.
Any new such order or settlement relating to the same issue
is subject to all the requirements of this section.
‘‘(c) PREEMPTION.—This section shall not be construed
to preempt any law of a State or political subdivision there-
of that imposes limitations on, or otherwise restricts the im-
position of, a tax, levy, or assessment that is imposed in
response to a court order or settlement referred to in sub-
section (b).
‘‘(d) ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS ON COURT ACTION.—
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), nothing in this
section may be construed to allow a Federal court to, for
the purpose of funding the administration of an order or
settlement referred to in subsection (b), use funds acquired
by a State or political subdivision thereof from a tax im-
posed by the State or political subdivision thereof.
‘‘(2) Paragraph (1) does not apply to any tax, levy,
or assessment that may, in accordance with applicable
State or local law, be used to fund the actions of a State
or political subdivision thereof in meeting the requirements
of an order or settlement referred to in subsection (b).
‘‘(e) NOTICE TO STATES.—The court shall provide
written notice to a State or political subdivision thereof
subject to an order or settlement referred to in subsection
(b) with respect to any finding required to be made by the
court under subsection (a). Such notice shall be provided
before the beginning of the next fiscal year of that State
or political subdivision occurring after the order or settle-
ment is issued.
‘‘(f) SPECIAL RULES.—For purposes of this section—
‘‘(1) the District of Columbia shall be considered
to be a State; and
‘‘(2) any Act of Congress applicable exclusively
to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be
a statute of the District of Columbia.’’.
(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of contents
for chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended
by adding after the item relating to section 1368 the follow-
ing new item:
‘‘1369. Limitation on Federal court remedies.’’.
(c) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing contained
in this section or the amendments made by this section shall
be construed to make legal, validate, or approve the imposi-
tion of a tax, levy, or assessment by a United States district
court or a spending measure required by a United States
district court.
(d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section and the amend-
ments made by this section shall apply with respect to any
action or other proceeding in a Federal court that is pend-
ing on, or commenced on or after, the date of the enactment
of this Act, and the 1-year limitation set forth in subsection
(b) of section 1369 of title 28, United States Code, as added
by this section, shall apply to any court order or settlement
described in subsection (a)(1) of such section 1369, that is
in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 6. REASSIGNMENT OF CASE AS OF RIGHT.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 21 of title 28, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
‘‘§ 464. Reassignment of cases upon motion by a party
‘‘(a) UPON MOTION.—(1) If all parties on one side of
a civil case to be tried in a United States district court
described in subsection (e) bring a motion to reassign the
case, the case shall be reassigned to another appropriate ju-
dicial officer. Each side shall be entitled to one reassign-
ment without cause as a matter of right.
‘‘(2) If any question arises as to which parties should
be grouped together as a side for purposes of this section,
the chief judge of the court of appeals for the circuit in
which the case is to be tried, or another judge of the court
of appeals designated by the chief judge, shall determine
that question.
‘‘(b) REQUIREMENTS
FOR BRINGING MOTION.—(1)
Subject to paragraph (2), a motion to reassign under this
section shall not be entertained unless it is brought, not
later than 20 days after notice of the original assignment
of the case, to the judicial officer to whom the case is as-
signed for the purpose of hearing or deciding any matter.
Such motion shall be granted if—
‘‘(A) it is presented before trial or hearing begins
and before the judicial officer to whom it is presented
has ruled on any substantial issue in the case, or
‘‘(B) it is presented by consent of the parties on
all sides.
‘‘(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1)—
‘‘(A) a party joined in a civil action after the
initial filing may, with the concurrence of the other
parties on the same side, bring a motion under this
section within 20 days after the service of the com-
plaint on that party;
‘‘(B) a party served with a supplemental or
amended complaint or a third-party complaint in a
civil action may, with the concurrence of the other
parties on the same side, bring a motion under this
section within 20 days after service on that party of
the supplemental, amended, or third-party complaint;
and
‘‘(C) rulings in a case by the judicial officer on
any substantial issue before a party who has not been
found in default enters an appearance in the case
shall not be grounds for denying an otherwise timely
and appropriate motion brought by that party under
this section.
‘‘(3) No motion under this section may be brought by
the party or parties on a side in a case if any party or
parties on that side have previously brought a motion to
reassign under this section in that case.
‘‘(c) COSTS OF TRAVEL TO NEW LOCATION.—(1) If a
motion to reassign brought under this section requires a
change in location for purposes of appearing before a newly
assigned judicial officer, the party or parties bringing the
motion shall pay the reasonable costs incurred by the par-
ties on different sides of the case in travelling to the new
location for all matters associated with the case requiring
an appearance at the new location. In a case in which both
sides bring a motion to reassign under this section that re-
quires a change in location, the party or parties bringing
the motions on both sides shall split the travelling costs re-
ferred to in the preceding sentence.
‘‘(2) For parties financially unable to obtain adequate
representation, the Government shall pay the reasonable
costs under paragraph (1).
‘‘(d) DEFINITION.—As used in this section, the term
‘appropriate judicial officer’ means—
‘‘(1) a United States magistrate judge in a case
referred to such a magistrate judge; and
‘‘(2) a United States district court judge in any
other case before a United States district court.
‘‘(e) DISTRICT COURTS THAT MAY AUTHORIZE REAS-
SIGNMENT.—The district courts referred to in subsection (a)
are the district courts for the 21 judicial districts for which
the President is directed to appoint the largest numbers of
permanent judges.
‘‘(f) 3-JUDGE COURT CASES EXCLUDED.—This section
shall not apply to any civil action required to be heard
and determined by a district court of 3 judges.’’.
(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents for
chapter 21 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following new item:
‘‘464. Reassignment of cases upon motion by a party.’’.
(c) MONITORING.—The Federal Judicial Center shall
monitor the use of the right to bring a motion to reassign
a case under section 464 of title 28, United States Code,
as added by subsection (a) of this section, and shall report
annually to the Congress its findings on the basis of such
monitoring.
(d) SUNSET.—Effective 5 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act, section 464 of title 28, United States
Code, and the item relating to that section in the table of
contents for chapter 21 of such title, are repealed, except
that such repeal shall not affect civil cases reassigned under
such section 464 before the date of repeal.
SEC. 7. RANDOM ASSIGNMENT OF HABEAS CORPUS CASES.
Section 2241 of title 28, United States Code, is amend-
ed by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(e) Applications for writs of habeas corpus received
in or transferred to a district court shall be randomly as-
signed to the judges of that court.’’.
SEC. 8. AUTHORITY OF PRESIDING JUDGE TO ALLOW MEDIA
COVERAGE OF APPELLATE COURT PROCEED-
INGS.
(a) AUTHORITY OF APPELLATE COURTS.—Notwith-
standing any other provision of law, the presiding judge
of an appellate court of the United States may, in his or
her discretion, permit the photographing, electronic record-
ing, broadcasting, or televising to the public of court pro-
ceedings over which that judge presides.
(b) AUTHORITY OF DISTRICT COURTS.—Notwithstand-
ing any other provision of law, any presiding judge of a
district court of the United States may, in his or her discre-
tion, permit the photographing, electronic recording, broad-
casting, or televising to the public of court proceedings over
which that judge presides.
(c) ADVISORY GUIDELINES.—The Judicial Conference
of the United States is authorized to promulgate advisory
guidelines to which a presiding judge, in his or her discre-
tion, may refer in making decisions with respect to the
management and administration of photographing, record-
ing, broadcasting, or televising described in subsections (a)
and (b).
(d) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section:
(1) PRESIDING
JUDGE.—The term ‘‘presiding
judge’’ means the judge presiding over the court pro-
ceeding concerned. In proceedings in which more than
one judge participates, the presiding judge shall be the
senior active judge so participating or, in the case of
a circuit court of appeals, the senior active circuit
judge so participating, except that—
(A) in en banc sittings of any United States
circuit court of appeals, the presiding judge shall
be the chief judge of the circuit whenever the
chief judge participates; and
(B) in en banc sittings of the Supreme
Court of the United States, the presiding judge
shall be the Chief Justice whenever the Chief Jus-
tice participates.
(2) 
APPELLATE
COURT
OF
THE
UNITED
STATES.—The term ‘‘appellate court of the United
States’’ means any United States circuit court of ap-
peals and the Supreme Court of the United States.
(e) SUNSET.—The authority under subsection (b) shall
terminate on the date that is 3 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 9. ADJUSTMENT OF SALARIES OF FEDERAL JUDGES.
(a) FUTURE ADJUSTMENTS.—Section 461(a) of title
28, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
‘‘(a) Effective as of the first day of the applicable pay
period beginning on or after the date on which an adjust-
ment takes effect under section 5303 of title 5 in the rates
of basic pay under the General Schedule (or under any
other provision of law in lieu thereof), each salary rate
which is subject to an adjustment under this section shall
be adjusted by an amount equal to the percentage of the
adjustment under such section 5303, rounded to the nearest
multiple of $100 (or if midway between multiples of $100,
to the next higher multiple of $100).’’.
(b) REPEAL.—Section 140 of Public Law 97–92 (95
Stat. 1200; 28 U.S.C. 461 note) is repealed.
(c) PAY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES.—
(1) IN
GENERAL.—Section 5372 of title 5,
United States Code, is amended—
(A) by redesignating subsection (c) as sub-
section (d); and
(B) by inserting after subsection (b) the fol-
lowing:
‘‘(c)(1) Any reference in this section to the rate of basic
pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule shall be consid-
ered a reference to the greater of—
‘‘(A) the rate of basic pay then currently in effect
under section 5315; or
‘‘(B) the rate of basic pay in effect under section
5315 on the effective date of this subsection, as ad-
justed under paragraph (2).
‘‘(2) Each time that rates of pay for the General Sched-
ule are adjusted, whether under section 5303 or another pro-
vision of law in lieu thereof, the rate under paragraph
(1)(B) (as last adjusted under this paragraph) shall be ad-
justed by the same percentage, and as of the same date, as
are the rates of pay for the General Schedule.’’.
(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Subsection (a)
of section 5372 of title 5, United States Code, is
amended to read as follows:
‘‘(a) For the purposes of this section—
‘‘(1) the term ‘administrative law judge’ means
an administrative law judge appointed under section
3105; and
‘‘(2) the term ‘the rate of basic pay for level IV
of the Executive Schedule’ is used as described in sub-
section (c).’’.
SEC. 10. MULTIPARTY, MULTIFORUM JURISDICTION OF DIS-
TRICT COURTS.
(a) BASIS OF JURISDICTION.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 85 of title 28, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing new section:
‘‘§ 1370. Multiparty, multiforum jurisdiction
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The district courts shall have
original jurisdiction of any civil action involving minimal
diversity between adverse parties that arises from a single
accident, where at least 25 natural persons have either died
or incurred injury in the accident at a discrete location
and, in the case of injury, the injury has resulted in dam-
ages which exceed $50,000 per person, exclusive of interest
and costs, if—
‘‘(1) a defendant resides in a State and a sub-
stantial part of the accident took place in another
State or other location, regardless of whether that de-
fendant is also a resident of the State where a sub-
stantial part of the accident took place;
‘‘(2) any two defendants reside in different
States, regardless of whether such defendants are also
residents of the same State or States; or
‘‘(3) substantial parts of the accident took place
in different States.
‘‘(b) SPECIAL RULES AND DEFINITIONS.—For pur-
poses of this section—
‘‘(1) minimal diversity exists between adverse
parties if any party is a citizen of a State and any
adverse party is a citizen of another State, a citizen
or subject of a foreign state, or a foreign state as de-
fined in section 1603(a) of this title;
‘‘(2) a corporation is deemed to be a citizen of
any State, and a citizen or subject of any foreign
state, in which it is incorporated or has its principal
place of business, and is deemed to be a resident of
any State in which it is incorporated or licensed to
do business or is doing business;
‘‘(3) the term ‘injury’ means—
‘‘(A) physical harm to a natural person;
and
‘‘(B) physical damage to or destruction of
tangible property, but only if physical harm de-
scribed in subparagraph (A) exists;
‘‘(4) the term ‘accident’ means a sudden acci-
dent, or a natural event culminating in an accident,
that results in death or injury incurred at a discrete
location by at least 25 natural persons; and
‘‘(5) the term ‘State’ includes the District of Co-
lumbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any
territory or possession of the United States.
‘‘(c) INTERVENING PARTIES.—In any action in a dis-
trict court which is or could have been brought, in whole
or in part, under this section, any person with a claim aris-
ing from the accident described in subsection (a) shall be
permitted to intervene as a party plaintiff in the action,
even if that person could not have brought an action in
a district court as an original matter.
‘‘(d) NOTIFICATION OF JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDIS-
TRICT LITIGATION.—A district court in which an action
under this section is pending shall promptly notify the judi-
cial panel on multidistrict litigation of the pendency of the
action.’’.
(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of sec-
tions at the beginning of chapter 85 of title 28,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end
the following new item:
‘‘1370. Multiparty, multiforum jurisdiction.’’.
(b) VENUE.—Section 1391 of title 28, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(g) A civil action in which jurisdiction of the district
court is based upon section 1370 of this title may be brought
in any district in which any defendant resides or in which
a substantial part of the accident giving rise to the action
took place.’’.
(c) MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION.—Section 1407 of title
28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end
the following:
‘‘(i)(1) In actions transferred under this section when
jurisdiction is or could have been based, in whole or in part,
on section 1370 of this title, the transferee district court
may, notwithstanding any other provision of this section,
retain actions so transferred for the determination of liabil-
ity and punitive damages. An action retained for the deter-
mination of liability shall be remanded to the district court
from which the action was transferred, or to the State court
from which the action was removed, for the determination
of damages, other than punitive damages, unless the court
finds, for the convenience of parties and witnesses and in
the interest of justice, that the action should be retained for
the determination of damages.
‘‘(2) Any remand under paragraph (1) shall not be
effective until 60 days after the transferee court has issued
an order determining liability and has certified its inten-
tion to remand some or all of the transferred actions for
the determination of damages. An appeal with respect to
the liability determination and the choice of law determina-
tion of the transferee court may be taken during that 60-
day period to the court of appeals with appellate jurisdic-
tion over the transferee court. In the event a party files such
an appeal, the remand shall not be effective until the appeal
has been finally disposed of. Once the remand has become
effective, the liability determination and the choice of law
determination shall not be subject to further review by ap-
peal or otherwise.
‘‘(3) An appeal with respect to determination of puni-
tive damages by the transferee court may be taken, during
the 60-day period beginning on the date the order making
the determination is issued, to the court of appeals with
jurisdiction over the transferee court.
‘‘(4) Any decision under this subsection concerning re-
mand for the determination of damages shall not be review-
able by appeal or otherwise.
‘‘(5) Nothing in this subsection shall restrict the au-
thority of the transferee court to transfer or dismiss an ac-
tion on the ground of inconvenient forum.’’.
(d) REMOVAL OF ACTIONS.—Section 1441 of title 28,
United States Code, is amended—
(1) in subsection (e) by striking ‘‘(e) The court
to which such civil action is removed’’ and inserting