Electronic filing is coming to the U.S. Supreme Court! Effective November 13, 2017, amendments to the Supreme Court’s rules take effect that require represented parties (and their amici) to submit petitions, briefs, and most other filings through the Court’s electronic filing system. The Rules explain that the new e-filing requirements are “[i]n addition to the filing requirements” already set forth in the Rules. Accordingly, parties and their amici will still be required to submit forty copies of their briefs on paper in booklet form, and they now must additionally submit one paper copy on 8.5 x 11 inch paper (in case the Clerk’s office needs to scan the brief for any reason). The paper submission remains the “official filing” for purposes of determining timeliness, but e-filing is supposed to occur “contemporaneously” with the paper filing. Pro se parties will continue to file submissions exclusively on paper; those submissions will be scanned by the Clerk’s office and posted on the Court’s web site.

Attorneys practicing before the Supreme Court will be required to register for an account on the Court’s electronic filing system. The Court warns that it could take two days for a new account to be approved, so attorneys should register well in advance of a filing deadline. Attorneys of record will also now be required to file notices of appearance using the Court’s e-filing system. Under the previous regime, the submission of a brief with an attorney’s information constituted a notice of appearance. Now, an attorney need not file a notice of appearance to submit a case-initiating document, such as a cert petition, but must make an appearance before filing any other document.

While the advent of e-filing creates a few new procedural hurdles, it also presents some obvious benefits to litigators. Primarily, all documents e-filed with the Court will be made available to the public free of charge, which will make it easier to access briefs and petitions filed in other cases. Moreover, counsel who enter an appearance will receive immediate notifications of any activity in the case. Under the old system, a party would not learn of an adversary’s filing until it arrived on paper by courier sometimes three days later, unless opposing counsel was courteous and emailed a courtesy copy.

E-filed documents will be posted immediately to the Supreme Court’s web site. (The lone exception is a document that commences a new case, which will first be reviewed by the Clerk’s office and the case assigned a number before the document becomes available to the public). Accordingly, the Court has promulgated new rules and guidelines to ensure that confidential information does not accidentally become public. Specifically, new Rule 34.6 incorporates the privacy protections found in Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2 in most cases. Moreover, documents containing material under seal must not be submitted electronically but only in paper form.  (This also holds true also for redacted forms of briefs submitted for the public record).

Given the Supreme Court’s arcane procedural rules, Proskauer’s Appellate Department recommends that any party or amicus practicing before the Court use an appellate printer to assist with filings. Printers are typically well-versed in the Court’s procedural minutiae and will be able to help you navigate the Court’s new e-filing process.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of John E. Roberts John E. Roberts

John E. Roberts is a partner in the Litigation Department and co-chair of the firm’s Appellate Practice Group, which was named to the National Law Journal’s 2020 Appellate Hot List. He litigates cutting-edge appellate matters in state and federal appellate courts across the…

John E. Roberts is a partner in the Litigation Department and co-chair of the firm’s Appellate Practice Group, which was named to the National Law Journal’s 2020 Appellate Hot List. He litigates cutting-edge appellate matters in state and federal appellate courts across the country, including the United States Supreme Court.

John’s advocacy led to a favorable decision by the Supreme Court in the landmark patent case, Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., and ultimately victory on remand at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. John has represented the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico—the entity created by Congress to oversee the restructuring of Puerto Rico’s massive public debt—in dozens of appeals at the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. He has also prevailed in some of the most important ERISA appeals in recent years.

John maintains a robust pro bono practice and is a member of the firm’s Pro Bono Initiative Committee. For more than five years, he has provided pro bono representation to a criminal defendant in a death penalty case. He has also provided pro bono representation to various advocacy organizations in high-impact litigations, including the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Citizens for Juvenile Justice, the Bronx Defenders, and the National Immigration Litigation Alliance.

John graduated magna cum laude from the New York University School of Law, where he was an articles editor for the New York University Law Review. He received his B.A. from Harvard University, where he graduated cum laude. He served as a clerk to the Honorable Bruce M. Selya, the most prolific opinion-writer in the history of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. He is an Adjunct Professor at the Roger Williams School of Law in Bristol, Rhode Island, where he teaches appellate advocacy, and he is a co-author of the treatise Principles of Appellate Litigation: A Guide to Modern Practice.

Before John attended law school, he worked as a journalist for National Public Radio for many years, where he was a co-creator of the national news program, On Point, and won several awards for his reporting. He lives in Providence, Rhode Island, with his husband, Michael.