The Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System

1 The Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver (IAALS) is a national, nonpartisan organization dedicated to improving the process and culture of the judicial System . We provide principled leadership, conduct comprehensive and objective research, and develop innovative and practical solutions all focused on serving the individuals and organizations who rely on the System to clarify rights and resolve disputes. For more information about us please visit our website at Copyright 2009 Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System .

2 All rights reserved. For reprints or to obtain additional copies, please contact the Institute at the address below. Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System at the University of Denver 2044 E. Evans Ave., HRTM Building, Suite 307 Denver, CO 80208 (303) 871-6600 Cite as: Institute FOR THE Advancement OF THE American Legal System , CIVIL CASE PROCESSING IN THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS (2009) STAFF Rebecca Love Kourlis Executive Director Pamela A. Gagel Assistant Director Jordan M. Singer Director of Research Michael Buchanan Research Analyst Natalie Knowlton Research Clerk Dallas Jamison Director of Marketing and Communications Erin Harvey Manager of Marketing and Communications Abigail McLane Executive Assistant Stephen P.

3 Ehrlich Consultant ii TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1 I. INTRODUCTION 11 II. HISTORY AND CONTEXT 14 III. METHODOLOGY 20 IV. FINDINGS 28 A.

4 Statistical Correlations 29 1. The strongest correlations 30 a. Elapsed time to set a trial date 30 b. Elapsed time to file a motion seeking additional discovery 31 c. Elapsed time to file motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment 34 2. Other correlations 35 B. A Closer Look at Case Processing in Each of the Subject Courts 36 1. Overall characteristics of the cases and subject courts 36 a. Nature of suit 36 b. Overall time to disposition 37 c.

5 Reopened cases 40 2. Scheduling conferences 40 3. Discovery motion practice 43 4. Dispositive motion practice 46 a.

6 Uncontested motions 46 b. Rule 12 motions 47 c. Rule 56 motions 49 5. The value of hearings and oral argument 52 6. Extensions and continuances 54 a.

7 Overview of findings on extensions and continuances 55 b. Extensions to answer the complaint 55 c. Extensions related to discovery 56 d. Extensions to respond to non-discovery motions 57 e. Extensions of a hearing or conference 58 f.

8 Miscellaneous extensions 58 g. Continuances 59 7. Trials 63 8. Settlement 65 a. Court-sponsored or court-ordered ADR 65 b. Scheduling conferences 66 c.

9 Setting early trial dates 67 9. Use of magistrate judges 68 10. A closer look at Arizona and Delaware 70 C. Cultural Factors Affecting Case Processing 72 1.

10 Local Legal culture 73 2. Local Rules and individual judge practices 75 3. Transparency and public reporting 77 4. Judicial leadership 80 V. SUMMARY OBSERVATIONS 84 iii FIGURES Figure 1: Overall Case Length in Days vs. Days Until Trial Date Set 31 Figure 2: Breakdown of All Cases by Nature of Suit 37 Figure 3: Disposition of Cases Based on Timing of Trial Setting 68 TABLES Table 1: Subject Districts Size and 2006 Federal Court Management Rankings 21 Table 2: Number of Cases Logged By District 24 Table 3: Time from Filing to Disposition for Selected Nature of Suit Categories 28 Table 4: Distribution of Cases by Overall Time from Filing to Disposition 38 Table 5.