On December 1, 2016, amendments to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 6(d) went into effect. At the same time, amendments to EDVa Local Civil Rule 7(F)(1) also went into effect. For practical purposes, the F.R.C.P amendments make ECF service good for nearly all purposes and eliminate the added 3-day cushion that applied to most response and reply filings. The EDVa Local Rule revision adds back the otherwise lost three days. While the overall consequence may seem insignificant, you should be alert to at least one nuance from these changes.
To appreciate the changes, we summarize below the F.R.C.P. Rule 6(d) amendment and the changes to Local Civil Rule 7(f)(1). Then we revisit the Sprint Option provision in the standard Rule 16(b) Scheduling Order used in the Alexandria Division. See R. Larson, “The 1-Week EDVa Discovery Sprint from Filing to Ruling in 7½ Days.” As explained below, the combined new F.R.C.P. and Local Rule amendments provide some added coverage for the beloved Sprint Option.
FRCP Rule 6(d) Amendments — Good-bye 3-Day Cushion
In April 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court approved the F.R.C.P. Rule 6(d) amendment that removes electronic service from the modes of service under Rule 5(b) that allows an extra three days for responses. The Rule before amendment provided:
(d) Additional Time After Certain Kinds of Service. When a party may or must act within a specified time after service and service is made under Rule 5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E), or (F), 3 days are added after the period would otherwise expire under Rule 6(a).
The workings of this Rule for the most part simply extended the motion response and reply times by three days. For example, a motion that provided 11 days for the response in fact provided 14 days because of the 3-day cushion that was automatically added. Now, when the services is by ECF (which is covered as electronic service under Rule 5(b)(2)(E)), the 3-day cushion vanishes.
The amended version of the Rule looks almost exactly the same except a close look shows that subpart 5(b)(2)(E) has been erased. This now-gone segment is where Rule 5(b) allows for electronic service, which we usually translate to mean ECF service. A quick look at Rule 5(b)(2)(E) suggests that the electronic service provisions apply only if the receiving party “consented in writing” to electronic service. You might conclude that the changes add to a big nothing because you perhaps could refuse to consent. You may have forgotten, however, that when you registered for ECF filing (as all EDVa practitioners are required to do) you consented to electronic service. The EDVA Complete E-Filing Policies and Procedures Manual provides in Chapter 4 that “[b]y participating in the electronic filing process, the parties consent to the electronic service of all documents and will make available electronic mail addresses for service.”
To this point in the analysis, the F.R.C.P. Rule 6(d) amendments effectively shorten the response and reply times for most motion pleadings.
Local Civil Rule 7(F)(1) Amendment — the 3 Lost Days Return
EDVa Local Civil Rule 7 covers local Motions practice. Subpart (F)(1) provides for filing response and reply briefs, and until the new revisions took effect set the filing dates at 11 days and three days respectively. But with the addition of the 3-day cushion, the effective response and reply dates have been 14 days and six days. The Local Rule subpart read (until now):
(1) All motions, unless otherwise directed by the Court and except as noted herein below in subsection 7(F)(2), shall be accompanied by a written brief setting forth a concise statement of the facts and supporting reasons, along with a citation of the authorities upon which the movant relies. Unless otherwise directed by the Court, the opposing party shall file a responsive brief and such supporting documents as are appropriate, within eleven (11) days after service and the moving party may file a rebuttal brief within three (3) days after the service of the opposing party’s reply brief. No further briefs or written communications may be filed without first obtaining leave of Court. [Emphasis added.]
Absent modification of this Local Rule, the amendments to F.R.C.P. Rule 6(d) would result in significantly shorter response and reply times.
The EDVa amendments to Local Civil Rule 7(F)(1) substitute 14 days and three days as the new response and reply dates. This Local Rule change was issued on extreme short notice—on November 17, 2016, only two weeks ago. So we are essentially back where we started. The major difference is that we have eliminated a provision appropriate to the time when nearly all pleadings traveled by snail mail.
When practicing in other Districts, be sure to check the Local Rules to see whether the EDVa changes have been adopted in the other District. Failure to check could potentially result in painful consequences.
The Sprint Option and the Alexandria Division’s Rule 16(b) Scheduling Order
The give/take changes described above are not entirely neutral. One difference is that the combined new F.R.C.P. and Local Rule amendments provide added coverage for the Sprint Option.
What we refer to as the “Sprint Option” is a creature of the standard Alexandria Division Rule 16(b) Scheduling Order, and it is not a Local Rules provision. The standard Scheduling Order issued by the Alexandria magistrate judges includes this language:
In order to provide for the prompt resolution of non-dispositive matters, a non-dispositive motion may be filed and served by no later than 5:00 p.m. on a Friday and noticed for a hearing at 10:00 a.m. on the following Friday. Under this expedited schedule, a response must be filed and served by no later than 5:00 p.m. the Wednesday before the hearing and any reply should be filed and served as early as possible on Thursday to give the Court time to review all pleadings before the hearing. At the moving party’s discretion, a non-dispositive motion may also be filed and noticed for a hearing in accordance with the briefing schedule provided in Local Civil 7(F)(1) discussed above in order to provide additional time for briefing and consideration by the Court. [emphasis added]
In short, file and serve by 5 PM on Friday, and you can be before the Court the next Friday morning.
This is a key provision that greatly disturbs lawyers from other districts, but also one that keep the Rocket Docket roaring forward. The 3-day cushion, however, had the potential to disrupt this process. To stay on the Sprint Option track, a party had to avoid the 3-day cushion in prior F.R.C.P. Rule 6(d). This required service of the pleading by “handing it to the person” to be served, or by leaving the pleading at the person’s home or office. For practice in the Alexandria Division, this was a major impediment if the opposing counsel (or local counsel) was anywhere outside of Alexandria.
The above-describe challenge goes away with the combined F.R.C.P. Rule 6(d) and EDVa Local Rule 7(F)(1) amendments. ECF service by 5:00 PM on Friday (with the NEF returned—service time is when the NEF issues, and not when you hit the last ECF button) suffices, and the Sprint Option is now more widely available without concerns about the in person service and the 3-day cushion. The same applies to the Sprint Option responses and replies—ECF filing is adequate service without adding the 3-day cushion.