The
numbers have been crunched and we have a winner! The United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Virginia — known nationally as the “Rocket
Docket” — had the fastest trial docket in the country in 2013. Once again. For
the sixth year in a row. The median time interval to trial for the 12-month
time period ending March 31, 2013, (the most recently released data) is 11.1
months. That’s 11.1 months from the filing of the complaint until the matter
was tried and concluded. That’s compared to a nationwide average of 23.8 months
to try a case. The EDVA is the fastest once again
By the Numbers
Judicial
Caseload Statistics (FJCS) every year after the Judicial Conference meets in
March. According to the latest data (ending March 31, 2013) the median time
interval to try a federal civil case in the Eastern District of Virginia
(Alexandria, Richmond, Norfolk and Newport News) is 11.1 months (compared to
12.9 months for this time period last year). The national “silver medalist”
goes to the Western District of Virginia (with court locations from
Charlottesville, west to Big Stone Gap, Virginia) with a median time of 12.0
months. There was a tie for the bronze medal this year between the District
Court of Hawaii and the District Court of Wyoming at 15.6 months.
The
absolute slowest court in the country to try a case? For the second straight
year, the Western District of New York clocks in at last, reporting an
astounding 67.1 months to try a case — even slower than last year, and almost
three times the national average and about six times as long as it takes in Virginia’s
Rocket Docket. The District Court of the District of Columbia is second to last
with a median time interval to trial of 43.5 months — about twice as long as
the national average. Other slowpokes include the District Court of Rhode
Island (40.4 months), District Court of Utah (38.8 months), and the District
Court of Connecticut (37.9 months).
The
statistics above concern average time through trial. But because most cases
aren’t tried, the average time to “disposition” is usually shorter. The FJCS
indicate that the national median interval for disposition of a federal civil
case was 8.4 months (slower than last year’s 6.8 months). But the average time
to disposition in the EDVA in 2013 was 5.0 months (even faster than last year’s
5.4 months). By this measure, too, the EDVA was the fastest docket in the
country in 2013. Close runners-up include the Southern District of Florida (5.2
months), the Central District of California (5.4 months), and the District of
Minnesota (5.4 months).
The
FJCS tell us the busiest (and sleepiest) federal district courts for civil
cases as well. The busiest include the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (12,617
cases, more than the entire Fourth Circuit, likely due to an enormous asbestos
docket), the Central District of California (12,112 cases), and the Northern
District of Illinois (8,741 cases). The sleepiest include the District Court of
Wyoming (213 cases), the District Court of North Dakota (159 cases), and, for
the adventurous, the District of the Northern Mariana Islands (29 cases) or the
District of Guam (26 cases).
What Fuels the
“Rocket Docket” Today?
Current
judges trace the origins of the Rocket Docket to Judges Walter E. Hoffman in
Norfolk and Albert V. Bryan Jr. in Alexandria. But Judge “Beef” Hoffman left
the bench after serving for over 40 years when he passed away in 1996. And the
EDVA Rocket Docket remains the fastest trial court in the land. What fuels the
“Rocket” today over 50 years after the reputation was first earned? We asked
some of the judges.
There
is no doubt that EDVA judges embrace the maxim “justice delayed is justice
denied.” Some trace the origins of this maxim to the Magna Carta almost 800
years ago in 1215. But whatever the origins of the maxim, the judges of the
EDVA put it in practice today. The sense is that “deadlines resolve cases,”
that by keeping the pressure on the litigants and counsel, cases will either
settle or be tried in a timely manner. But that is a philosophy. What practices
actually keep the EDVA rocking?
Two
keys to the continuing efficiency of the EDVA Rocket Docket are the Rule 16(b)
Scheduling Order and the effectiveness of the senior judges and magistrate
judges. For instance, the Rule 16(b) procedure in three divisions is that
shortly after the parties are at issue (an answer has been filed) they meet
with a docket clerk and set the case for trial. The trial date will ordinarily
be set approximately seven months from the scheduling conference, which is
likely about nine months from the initial filing of the suit. In addition to
the early setting of the trial date — which is not easily continued — numerous
other deadlines are set at the scheduling conference, including discovery and
expert deadlines. The early trial date, meaningful deadlines and rare
continuances combine to keep the docket moving. The other division has similar
scheduling mechanisms to set early trial dates.
But
the senior judges and magistrate judges also are a key to the Rocket Docket’s
speed. Many of the EDVA senior judges continue to take full or substantially
full dockets, which helps ease the pressure. And the district judges routinely
refer discovery disputes to the magistrate judges. Most magistrate judges will
quickly schedule a hearing and make rulings, often from the bench. EDVA
magistrate judges do not hesitate to make tough calls, to call the proverbial
“balls and strikes.” If a party missed the Local Rule 26(C) requirement that
objections be made in 15 days (as opposed to when the discovery is due), on a
motion to compel, the magistrate judge may very well overrule all late
objections. But whatever the ruling, it is likely to be made quickly, keeping
the case from bogging down in interminable discovery disputes. The magistrate
judges’ effectiveness, availability and willingness to ride heard over the
discovery process is key.
Another
point should be made. While it doesn’t increase the speed of trial — since
there’s no trial in such a case — the EDVA’s willingness to timely dismiss
cases on motions to dismiss or motions for summary judgment keep the statistics
for disposition of “total cases” remarkable low. This year the median time
interval for resolution of all cases was a lightning fast five months in the
EDVA, also fastest anywhere. The fact that the judges in the EDVA will often
rule on such motions in a month or so also contributes to the speed of the overall
docket.
In
last year’s article, we discussed in some detail the EDVA divisions, including
Alexandria, Richmond, Norfolk and Newport News, and some of their nuances.
These cities form a crescent on the map sweeping from Alexandria in the D.C.
suburbs, through Richmond and Newport News, to Norfolk near the Atlantic Ocean
in the southeast. We emphasized then, as we do now, that when practicing in the
EDVA it is critically important to read and know the local rules, which are available here. Each division and judge may also have
some written and unwritten local rules that are known to local practitioners.
An outline of specific practice tips and the key local rules are included in
our prior article.
Patent Practice in
the EDVA and the “Patent Wheel”
The
fact that the EDVA is the fastest trial docket in the country is not lost on
parties and counsel seeking speedy trials in patent and other high stakes
intellectual property matters where the parties have a choice of venue. For
instance, in 2008 there were 67 patent cases in the EDVA. By 2013, that number
more than doubled to 170 patent cases. More and more patent cases are coming to
the EDVA likely because of its speedy resolution. That said, a review of the
docket will illustrate that the EDVA judges will not hesitate to transfer cases
to a more appropriate venue when appropriate.
Patent
cases, often with multimillion dollar stakes and additional procedural
requirements, take more court resources. And while electronic filing has
created significant efficiencies, court resources have been drawn down by budget
cuts. For instance, the Norfolk Division had 11 case managers in 2008. The
number of Norfolk case managers was down to five by 2013. Patent cases also
require additional judicial resources to deal with Markman hearings and often
multifaceted summary judgment motions. These factors — coupled with the court’s
speed of resolution — create a strain on the system.
That
strain is particularly acute in the Alexandria division. As a District of
Columbia suburb, many national law firms with D.C. offices can conveniently
file patent and other cases in the Alexandria Division of the EDVA. Not
surprisingly, many more patent cases are filed there than in Richmond and
Norfolk. The judges of the EDVA have a mechanism to address the
disproportionate filing of cases and it is called the “patent wheel.” The EDVA
patent wheel is a system whereby the patent cases filed in Alexandria are
transferred on a rotating basis to other divisions within the district, meaning
Richmond or Norfolk. In this way, the judges share the load. And as a result,
patent litigants filing in the D.C. suburbs of Alexandria often find themselves
litigating in Richmond or Norfolk, Virginia, about 100 and 200 miles away from
Alexandria respectively. Each of these courts, of course, have their own judges
and specialized procedures.
The
EDVA does not have a published set of patent rules. While there were
discussions several years ago about creating rules and/or a patent case
scheduling order, nothing was officially adopted. Some of the judges, however,
have incorporated some of those ideas in their own rules or practices or even
their own patent pretrial order. For instance, while the trial is usually set
approximately seven months from the initial pretrial conference in a typical
case in several divisions, some EDVA judges have been allowing trials to be set
approximately nine months from the IPTC in patent cases in acknowledgement of
the additional time often required to address Markman hearings. At this point,
many of the judges still have their individual procedures and it is best to
consult with local practitioners once a judge is assigned to determine that
judge’s patent practice.
Another
factor that eases the strain of the high patent case load in the EDVA is the
willingness of certain EDVA senior judges to take patent cases. Senior judges
have flexibility to not take certain cases. And many senior judges may prefer
not to take death cases, or patent cases, or other cases they may not enjoy.
But in the EDVA some extremely capable senior judges are still taking patent
cases easing the load on their fellow judges, division and district./
Conclusion
Even
with its growing patent caseload, the EDVA is the fastest trial docket in the
country for the sixth straight year. Time honored procedures, disciplined
administration of local rules, and an engaged and active judiciary all
contribute to this amazing track record of efficiency and effectiveness.
|