Newsletter of the Federal Courts Vol. 43 Number 2 February 2011

Judicial Emergency Declared in Arizona ........................................................pg. 3

Committee Changes in House and Senate ......................................................pg. 5

Pilot Program to Enhance Expertise in Patent Cases ..............................................pg. 7

INSIDE

See USMS Director on page 4

On a Mission to Strengthen the Federal Legal System

The federal lawyers and judges of the Federal Bar

Association work together for a stronger federal system justice. FBA National President Ashley Belleau talks about the associa-tion’s mission and her goals for 2011 beginning on page 10.

INtErvIEw

Judiciary Pays Tribute to Judge John M. Roll

O n January 8, 2011, Chief Judge John Roll of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona was among six people shot and killed in Tucson while attending a constituent gathering sponsored by Representative Gabrielle Giffords. Roll, who was appointed to the federal

bench in 1991, had served as chief judge of the district since 2006. In the wake of his death, flags were lowered at federal courthouses across the county and thousands of people—many of whom had worked with him—paid tribute to Judge Roll’s life and mourned his passing. A few of the statements are included here.

See Judge John M. Roll on page 2

New U.S. Marshals Service Director

The first female director of the U.S. Marshals Service, Stacia A. Hylton, was sworn in on

December 31, 2010 in a ceremony officiated by Judge Claude M. Hilton (E.D. Va.) at the U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia, and attended by family members. Hylton is the 10th director of the U.S. Marshals Service.

The appointment is a return for Hylton to the U.S. Marshals Service. From 1980 to 2004, she served as acting deputy director, assistant director for prisoner operations, chief deputy in the District of South Carolina, chief of judicial security

“The violence in Arizona today has sense-lessly taken six lives and inflicted tragic loss on dedicated public servants and their families. We in the Judiciary have suffered the terrible loss of one of our own. Chief Judge John Roll was a wise jurist who selflessly served Arizona and the nation with great distinction, as attorney and judge, for more than 35 years. I express my deepest condolences to his wife Maureen and his children, as well as the other victims and their families. Chief Judge Roll’s death is a somber reminder of the importance of the rule of law and the sacrifices of those who work to secure it.”

Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr.“All of us in the Ninth Circuit court family

were shocked and terribly saddened to learn today of the death of Chief District Judge John M. Roll. Our hearts go out to his family and to all of the families of those killed or injured in this senseless tragedy.

“Judge Roll was a widely respected jurist, a strong and able leader of his court, and a kind, courteous and sincere gentleman. He worked tirelessly to improve the delivery of justice to the people of Arizona. He was always upbeat, optimistic, enthusiastic, and positive in his outlook. He touched many lives.”

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Supreme Court Tucson, AZ

The Third Branch n February 20112

‘hardest working judge.’ Well, I know he is! He worked very hard, but it was always for the good of the Judiciary and the District of Arizona, so all of his staff were more than willing to work by his side. We all miss him.

He couldn’t have been a nicer boss—always a ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ and such a gentleman—every time I went into his office for dictation or questions, he would stand up when I entered.

He was chief judge for the District of Arizona for nearly five years and took no reduction in caseload. Yet, every year he personally read 350+ law clerk applica-tions. He always hired two term law clerks. Of course this involved training on both of our parts, but he always wanted to give as many intelligent young lawyers this oppor-tunity as possible. Judge Roll was the best example and mentor to each of them and we all remain a close family today. Almost all of them flew from all over the United States to be present at his funeral Mass and to comfort his wife Maureen.”

Katy HigginsJudicial Assistant to Judge John Roll

“Judge Roll was many things to many different people. He was a great judge, colleague, husband, father, and friend. But I’ll always remember him as a kind and patient mentor. On a daily basis he went out of his way to ask my opinion on legal issues and to include me in all facets of the judicial process. The Judge always made me feel as though I played an essential role in keeping his chambers and courtroom

“John has been my friend and colleague for over thirty years. My first memory of him is 30 years ago when I began as Assistant US Attorney preparing for the trial of one of my first cases in Tucson, Arizona. Despite his busy schedule, John went out of his way, with ultimate kindness, to assist me in the preparation. As the Chief of the District, he has always expressed the same kindness to all who needed it while exqui-sitely performing his judicial responsibil-ities. I really miss him.”

Chief Judge Roslyn SilverU.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

“The Federal Judiciary and the country suffered a grievous loss in the death of Chief Judge John Roll of the District of

Arizona, a tireless champion of equal justice and the rule of law. Judge Roll led one of the nation’s busiest federal trial courts with great distinction. He was a dear friend and respected colleague, and he devoted himself to improving the administration of justice. I know I speak for every member of the federal court family as I express my heartfelt sadness and extend to Judge Roll’s family our deepest sympathies.”

James DuffDirector, Administrative

Office of the U.S. Courts

“Just being associated with John Roll made you want to be a better person. He led by example, treating everyone, regardless of their station, with genuine respect and dignity. He was warm, funny, optimistic, empathetic, passionate about what he believed, always fair and equitable. He loved his wife, his sons, his grandchildren, his mother-in-law, and his extended family without bounds. He enjoyed hearing about your family as much as he liked talking about his own. He was disciplined and worked extremely hard in a fraternity of hard workers. His unbounded energy and love for life and the law will not soon be equaled.”

Richard H. (Rick) WeareDistrict Court Executive/Clerk

U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

“I have worked for Chief Judge Roll for 19 years, ever since he was appointed to the bench. Many people say he is the Continued on next page

Boston, MA Portland, ME Billings, MT St. Louis, MO

Judge John M. Roll (D-Ariz.)

Judiciary Pays Tribute to Judge John M. Rollcontinued from page 1

The Third Branch n February 2011 3

Legislation to Name Yuma Courthouse in Roll’s HonorU.S. Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl of Arizona have introduced legislation to name the

soon-to-be constructed federal courthouse in Yuma, Arizona, the “John M. Roll United States Courthouse.” In a joint statement shortly after the shooting, the senators said:

“We had the privilege and honor of knowing and working with Chief Judge Roll for many

years. He was known for his fairness to all who appeared before him in his courtroom, both

plaintiffs and defendants. As chief judge, he was a tireless advocate for all Arizonans, working

to guarantee the federal courts in our state were capable of handling the growing caseload

while ensuring swift justice for all. On Saturday morning he was tragically killed continuing this

advocacy. We are eternally grateful for his many years of public service as a bailiff, a prosecutor

and a judge.

“Our state has lost an outstanding jurist, a true and able public servant, and a great

Arizonan. Therefore, we believe naming the soon-to-be constructed courthouse in his honor is

befitting the rich legacy he leaves behind.”

Chief Judge Roll was a strong advocate for the addition of a new courthouse in Yuma and recently approved the design for the building. Construction is scheduled to begin on the courthouse in July 2011 and completion is anticipated by 2013.

running. When we would discuss a case, he would, without interruption, allow me to first explain my research and thoughts before asking questions and arriving at his ultimate decision. Leading and teaching by example, Judge Roll has left an indelible mark on both my professional and personal life.

I will miss observing the respectful and patient way with which he presided over trials and interacted with attorneys and parties. I will miss the way he personally greeted each and every probation officer every morning before meeting with them to discuss the day’s sentencings. I will miss watching him show-off his

visiting grandchildren to practically every department in the courthouse. I will miss the time he took to swing by my office and talk about the previous night’s Arizona Wildcats basketball game.

I have lost a friend and mentor I will never be able to replace. But we must remember everything we gained from having known this great man. I know I will never forget his compassion, patience, humor, unwavering sense of justice, and his genuine desire to put others’ needs before his own. What a truly incredible judge and American.”

Michael Waits, Law Clerk to Chief Judge John M. Roll

Judicial Emergency Declared in Arizona

Chief Judge Roslyn O. Silver has declared a judicial emergency in the U.S. District Court for the

District of Arizona that will temporarily suspend the time limit set by the Speedy Trial Act to bring accused criminals to trial.

The judicial emergency took effect on January 20 and was set to expire on February 19, 2011, but at Silver’s request the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit agreed to exercise its authority under federal law to extend the judicial emergency by one year. Complaints and indictments brought during this combined 13-month period will not be subject to the 70-day trial requirement.

“The need to suspend the time limits is of great urgency due to a heavy criminal caseload, a lack of adequate resources, and the tragic death of Chief Judge John Roll on January 8, 2011,” Silver wrote in an order announcing the emergency. “The District of Arizona ranks first in the Ninth Circuit and third in the nation for criminal case and defendant filings, an increase of 65 percent since 2008. During this same time, the Tucson criminal division of the United States Attor-ney’s Office for the District of Arizona has doubled in size, adding AUSA’s to prosecute border crimes. There has been no corresponding increase in judgeships or other judicial resources.”

Three judges in the district’s Tucson division handle approximately 1,200 cases each. The district is authorized 13 judgeships and currently has three vacancies, two of them in the Tucson division, where Judge John Roll was killed last month. Roll had pursued a decla-ration of judicial emergency in the district in November 2010.

“The district court in Arizona urgently needs additional resources. Judicial vacancies need to be filled and new

See Judicial Emergency on page 4

Tribute to Judge John M. Rollcontinued from page 2

The Third Branch n February 20114

Judicial Emergencycontinued from page 3 Criminal Caseload Comparison:

District of Arizona and Average District Court 2004–2009

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20100

100

200

300

400

500AZ Criminal Felony Cases per Judgeship

Average Criminal Felony Caseload perJudgeship for District Courts Nationwide

See Pocket Guide on page 9

Pocket Guide for Federal Judges Focuses on Sealed Records, Proceedings

A recently published pocket guide for federal judges focuses on the occasional need to seal court

records and proceedings.Published by the Federal Judicial

Center, the 22-page pocket guide draws upon the voluminous case law the process courts use to keep some of their proceedings and records confidential.

“Essential to the rule of law is the public performance of the judicial function,” the guide states. “On occasion, however, there are good reasons for courts to keep parts of some proceedings confidential…. Usually that means that any transcript made of the proceeding will be regarded as a sealed record.”

Protecting the confidentiality of national security information, ongoing investigations, trade secrets, and the identities of minors are examples of such good reasons, the guide said.

In addition, grand jury proceedings are held in secret to protect those not charged with crimes. And actions filed under the

judgeships should be given strong consid-eration. There is also a need for more court staff and facilities,” said Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski.

The emergency declaration does not affect another Speedy Trial act provision requiring filing of an indictment within 30 days of arrest, nor does it affect the time limits for defendants in custody solely because they are awaiting trial.

programs, witness security inspector, U.S. Marshals Academy instructor, and as a member of the agency’s special opera-tions group. In total, she has served in federal law enforcement within the Department of Justice for 29 years, including service as the federal detention trustee from 2004 to 2010.

“The Marshals Service has a rich and proud history and it is an honor to return to the agency and lead the men and women of this great organization,” Hylton said in a statement. “Like many

USMS Directorcontinued from page 1

USMS Director Stacia Hylton met last month with AO Director Jim Duff. Clockwise, from far left, Ross Einsenman, Associate Director of Facilities and Security at the AO, USMS Director Stacia Hylton, AO Director Jim Duff, USMS Deputy Director Chris Dudley, USMS Chief of Staff David Anderson, and Ed Templeman, Chief AO Court Security Office.

law enforcement agencies, we face significant challenges, but I am confident the agency will continue to excel in the execution of our missions and work with our fellow law enforcement partners in securing our country.”

The new USMS director is a recipient of the Attorney General’s Edmund J. Randolph Award for outstanding contri-butions to the department’s mission and the Presidential Rank Award for Distin-guished Service.

Hylton earned her bachelor’s degree in criminal justice from Northeastern University.

The Third Branch n February 2011 5

House and Senate Committee Changes in 112th Congress

With the 112th Congress, congressional committee leadership changed.

Senate Judiciary Committeen Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Chairmann Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA), Ranking

Minority Member Senate Judiciary Subcommittee members had not yet been named as The Third Branch went to press.

House Judiciary Committeen Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), Chairmann Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-MI), Ranking

Minority Member

Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Lawn Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC), Chairmann Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN), Ranking

Minority Member

Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Securityn Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-WI),

Chairman n Rep. Robert C. Scott (D-VA), Ranking

Minority Member

Senate Appropriations Committeen Senator Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI),

Chairmann Senator Thad Cochran (R-MS), Ranking

Minority Member

Financial Services and General Government Subcommitteen Senator Richard C. Durbin (D-IL),

Chairmann Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS), Ranking

Minority Member

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT)

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA)

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-MI)

Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC)

Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN)

Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI)

Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS)

Rep. Harold Rogers (R-KY)

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO)

Rep. Norman Dicks (D-WA)

Sen. Richard C. Durbin (D-IL)

Sen. Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI)

Rep. José Serrano (D-NY)

Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS)

Rep. Robert C. Scott (D-VA)

House Appropriations Committeen Rep. Harold Rogers (R-KY), Chairmann Rep. Norman D. Dicks (D-WA)

Financial Services and General Government Subcommitteen Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO),

Chairmann Rep. José Serrano (D-NY), Ranking

Minority Member

The Third Branch n February 20116

Territorial Courts in the Federal Judiciary

Seventy-five years ago, the Organic Act established a Constitution and new government for the Territory

of the U.S. Virgin Islands. Less than a year later, in March 1937, President Roosevelt appointed William H. Hastie, the terri-tory’s first federal judge—and the first African American to be a federal judge. As an Article I judge, Hastie served a fixed term from 1937 to 1939. (Hastie went on to become the first African American federal appellate judge when he was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in 1950).

The federal territorial courts—their rich history, varied caseloads, and dedicated judges—are a civic teacher’s dream. Their work involves powers found in Articles I, III and IV of the Constitution.

Today, the U.S. Virgin Islands is one of only three U.S. territorial courts. Their territorial courts are presided over by Article I judges. Article I judgeships were established in Guam in 1950, and in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) in 1977.

These courts are Article IV U.S. district courts, so-called because under Article IV of the Constitution, “Congress shall have the power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the Territory or other property belonging to the United States.”

The federal courts in these territories hear cases arising out of federal law, including bankruptcy cases. Their judges are appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, for fixed terms of 10 years. Territorial court decisions may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands) or the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the U.S. Virgin Islands).

What of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, an unincorporated territory of the

United States? A 1966 federal law made Puerto Rico one of the 94 Article III judicial districts. Federal judges in Puerto Rico are appointed by the President and serve lifetime appointments as Article III judges. Their decisions are appealable to the First Circuit.

While American Samoa also is an unincorporated territory of the United States—with its own constitution and representative government—it does not have a U.S. district court. The High Court of American Samoa has limited juris-diction to hear cases under certain federal statutes such as food safety, protection of animals, conservation, and shipping.

“We do everything,” said Chief Judge Curtis Gomez, referring to his caseload in the U.S. Virgin Islands. “We perform all the functions of an Article III district court. In that capacity, we usually preside over more trials than the national average. Plus, we also serve as the appellate court for the local Superior Court. In that capacity, we review family matters and civil and criminal cases with no federal nexus. That part of our caseload is diminishing as the Virgin Islands now has a Supreme Court that hears those appeals.”

Gomez earned his law degree from Harvard and was in private practice with law firms in Washington DC and the Virgin Islands. He served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) in the Eastern District of Virginia before returning to the Virgin Islands as an AUSA. Born and raised in the Virgin Islands, and cognizant of the brain drain of young people to the mainland United States, he wanted the opportunity to stay and help.

In addition to managing a heavy and varied caseload, the court started a

re-entry program to reduce recidivism and, according to Gomez, it’s off to a good start with many businesses willing to employ offenders. “We have to gainfully engage reentrants and the community is there to help,” he said.

Sometimes, holding court in the Virgin Islands, where three islands are separated by water, can be a challenge, especially when selecting jurors. “We don’t have a broad pool, and it’s not uncommon for someone to say, ‘I know the defendant.’ We also have language issues where jurors may not be quite fluent in English. And many of our jurors are involved in the tourist industry. If they’re called for jury duty at the height of the season, it can be a financial hardship,” said Gomez.

Chief Judge Frances Marie Tydingco-Gatewood sits in Hagatna, the capital of Guam. A prosecutor for 10 years and a judge for 17, first as a trial judge on the Superior Court of Guam, then as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of Guam, she was appointed an Article I federal judge in 2006. She is the first Chamorro female chief judge in Guam; Chamorros are the indigenous people of the Mariana Archipelagos, which includes Guam. “It was the easiest decision ever to return to Guam,” she said, after earning her undergraduate degree from Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and her law degree from the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law. “Who wouldn’t want to live in paradise?”

Paradise, however, has real world problems. The Guam caseload is predom-inately criminal. There are enough drug cases that the court now has a special program to deal with these offenders.

Continued on next page

The Third Branch n February 2011 7

Immigration offenses also are an increasing problem. As the nearest federal court to the military bases in Okinawa, the court also hears cases involving non-military dependants. Tydingco-Gatewood also sits as the chief judge of the bankruptcy court. And with a long-standing judicial vacancy in the Common-wealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, she flies in to help with cases and handle the day-to-day administrative matters. Judges from the Ninth Circuit also are assigned to help the court. A nomination has just been made to fill that vacancy and awaits Senate confirmation.

Judge Consuelo Marshall (C. D. Cal.) chairs the Ninth Circuit’s Pacific Islands Committee, a committee formed to assist and train the courts in the Pacific, such as the Marshall Islands, a former trust territory, but now an independent country, and American Samoa. The Republic of Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia and the Marshall Islands have compacts

Territorial Courtscontinued from page 6

with the United States, which provide certain types of aids, including funds for training their judiciaries.

“A court may request training on a particular subject or U.S. judges may go there as faculty to provide training to judges, lawyers and court staff. Judges from the islands also attend training at the National Judicial College and the Federal Judicial Center,” said Marshall. “We teach process: how to conduct a fair trial, case management, how to handle case backlogs, and when it is appropriate for judges to recuse themselves in a case, as well as other issues. Last year, voters in the Republic of Palau approved a system of trial by jury. I was invited by their Chief Justice to train on jury selection, jury instructions, responding to questions from a deliberating jury, taking the verdict, and other issues associated with jury trials.”

The federal Judiciary’s territorial judges also bring something unique to their home islands. As Tydingco-Gatewood expressed it, “Being from Guam just makes me a better judge for Guam.”

Pilot Program to Enhance Expertise in Patent Cases

Legislation just signed into law by the President will start a decade-long pilot program in which some district

courts will be given an opportunity to enhance their expertise in handling patent cases.

H.R. 628, now Pub. L. No. 11-349, was introduced by Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) with cosponsors Representatives Howard Coble (R-NC), Hank Johnson, Jr. (D-GA), and Adam B. Schiff (D-CA). The Judicial Conference did not take a position on the legislation.

Issa drafted the legislation with his colleague, Schiff, “in an attempt to decrease the cost of litigation by increasing the success of district court judges.”

Under the pilot program, those district judges who request to hear patent cases are designated by the chief judge to hear them. Patent cases filed in participating district courts are first randomly assigned to all district judges, regardless of whether they have been designated to hear such cases. A judge who is randomly assigned a patent case and is not among the desig-nated judges may decline to accept the case. That case is then randomly assigned to one of the district judges designated to hear patent cases. Senior judges of a district court may participate if at least one judge of the court in regular active service is also designated.

“I partnered with Mr. Issa on the bill (H.R. 628),” Schiff said, “because we share a deep interest in improving the efficiency of the patent process, in reducing litigation costs and inefficiencies in patent review, and also in improving the quality of patents.” The current law,

he explained, grew from a hearing in the 109th Congress on improving federal court adjudication of patent cases in response to high rates of reversal—and where serious concerns were expressed about proposals that would create new specialized courts.”

The new law, Schiff said, would preserve the principle of random assignment in order to prevent forum shopping among the pilot districts.

Co-sponsor Johnson said that the program will “create a cadre of judges who gain advanced knowledge of patent and plant variety protection through more intensified experience in handling the cases, along with special education and career development opportunities.”

Courts eligible to participate in the program are the 15 district courts in which the largest number of patent and plant variety protection cases were filed in calendar year 2010, or the district courts that have adopted, or certified the intention to adopt, local rules for patent and plant variety protection cases. From among the eligible courts, the Director of the Administrative Office will select three district courts having at least 10 autho-rized district judgeships in which at least three judges have made a request to hear patent cases, and three district courts having fewer than 10 authorized district judgeships in which at least two judges have made a request to hear patent cases.

The pilot will run for 10 years after the courts in the pilot program are desig-nated. During that time, periodic reports will be made to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees.

District judges who request to hear patent cases

are designated by the chief judge to hear them.

The Third Branch n February 20118

Published monthly by theAdministrative Office of the U.S. Courts

Office of Public AffairsOne Columbus Circle, N.E.Washington, D.C. 20544

(202) 502-2600

Visit our Internet site at www.uscourts.gov

DIRECTORJames C. Duff

EDITOR-IN-CHIEFDavid A. Sellers

MANAGING EDITORKaren E. Redmond

PRODUCTIONOmniStudio, Inc.

CONTRIBUTORDick Carelli, AO

Please direct all inquiries and address changes to The Third Branch at the above address or to

Karen_Redmond@ao.uscourts.gov.

Up-to-date information on judicial vacancies is available at

http://www.uscourts.gov/JudgesAndJudgeships/JudicialVacancies.aspx

February Judicial Milestones

JUDICIAL BOXSCOrE

Appointed: Albert Diaz, as U.S. Court of Appeals Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, December 22, 2010.

Appointed: Raymond J. Lohier Jr., as U.S. Court of Appeals Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, January 3.

Appointed: Mary H. Murguia, as U.S. Court of Appeals Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, January 4.

Appointed: Kathleen M. O’Malley, as U.S. Court of Appeals Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, December 27, 2010.

Appointed: James K. Bredar, as U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, December 2, 2010.

Appointed: Denis Jefferson Casper, as U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, January 17.

Appointed: Edmond E-Min Chang, as U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, January 7.

Appointed: Catherine C. Eagles, as U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, December 23.

Appointed: John A. Gibney, Jr., as U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, December 27, 2010.

Appointed: Ellen Lipton Hollander, as U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, January 4.

Appointed: Leslie E. Kobayashi, as U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii, December 22, 2010.

Appointed: Kimberly J. Mueller, as U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, December 21, 2010.

Appointed: Susan Richard Nelson, as U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, December 22, 2010.

Appointed: Carlton W. Reeves, as U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, December 30, 2010.

Appointed: Bruce T. Beesley, as U.S. Bankruptcy Judge, U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada, January 3.

Appointed: Mark Dinsmore, as U.S. Magistrate Judge, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, December 17, 2010.

Appointed: Paul S. Grewal, as U.S. Magistrate Judge, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, December 1, 2010.

This month, Milestones exceeded the available space. Please visit the Third Branch online at www.uscourts.gov/news/TheThirdBranch.aspx to read the complete Milestones for February.

As of February 1, 2011

Courts of Appeals

Vacancies ...........................................17 Nominees ..........................................9

District Courts

Vacancies ...........................................84 Nominees ..........................................39

Courts with“Judicial Emergencies” ....................49

The Third Branch n February 2011 9

Pocket Guidecontinued from page 4

Swearing-In Ceremonies Celebrate Our Elected Government

Local swearing-in ceremonies for new members of the 112th Congress have taken place at several federal courthouses.

“A local swearing-in ceremony enables all the family, friends and constituents of your congressional delegation, who are unable to travel to Washington, DC for the official ceremony, to see them sworn in and to celebrate their elected representative government,” said Judge D. Brock Hornby, chair of the Judicial Branch Committee.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas and the District of Guam both conducted ceremonies last month. Judge John W. Lungstrum (D. Kan.) presided over the swearing-in ceremony of Congressman Kevin Yoder (R-KS), at which a local high school jazz band played and the Sons of the American Revolution presented the colors. In the Guam District Court, Chief Judge Frances Tydingco-Gatewood swore in Congress-woman Madeleine Z. Bordallo (D–GU) for her fifth term.

“After all my years serving Congress,” Bordallo said in a statement, “I have finally been able to take my oath of office in front of the people whom I truly serve and represent.”

Congressman Kevin W. Yoder is sworn in by Judge John W. Lungstrum at ceremonies held at the Robert J. Dole U.S. Courthouse in Kansas City, Kansas.

(Left to right) Congresswoman Madeleine Z. Bordallo, sister Diana Ysrael, sister-in-law Josephine Bordallo Coad, and Chief Judge Frances Tydingco-Gatewood (D. GU) at Bordallo’s swearing-in ceremony held for the first time in Guam.

federal False Claims Act, in which persons allege that a fraud has been perpetrated against the government, are initially sealed without notice to the defendant.

The guide offers a procedural checklist of considerations when a record is sealed or a proceeding closed to the public:n Absent authorization by statute or rule,

permission to seal must be given by a judicial officer.

n Motions to seal should be publicly docketed.

n Members of the news media and the public must be afforded an opportunity to be heard on motions to seal.

n There should be a public record of permission to seal.

n Sealing should be no more extensive than necessary.

n The record of what is sealed and why should be complete for appellate review.

n Records should be unsealed when the need for sealing expires.

“In the end, whether a judicial record should be sealed depends on the judgment and discretion of the presiding judge…. The court has discretion to weigh the need for secrecy against the

public’s right of access,” the guide said. “Court records should be sealed to keep confidential only what must be kept secret, temporarily or permanently, as the situation requires. Sealing of judicial records is not considered appropriate if it is done merely to protect parties from embarrassment.”

The guide is available online at http://www.fjc.gov/public/pdf.nsf/lookup/sealing_guide.pdf/$file/sealing_guide.pdf.

The Judicial Conference voted in March 2009 to make the existence of federal court sealed cases more readily apparent by having Internet-based lists of civil and criminal cases in district courts include a case number and generic name, such as Sealed vs. Sealed, for each sealed case.

Some courts previously had not included sealed cases on their docket lists.

“…whether a judicial record should be sealed depends on the judgment and discretion of the presiding judge… The court has discretion to weigh the need for secrecy against the public’s right of access.”

The Third Branch n February 201110

INtErvIEw

Ashley Belleau, a partner in a New Orleans law firm, became the Federal Bar Association’s 83rd

National President in September 2010.

Q: How would you describe the relationship between the members of the Federal Bar Association and the federal Judiciary?

A: The relationship between the members of the Federal Bar Association and the federal Judiciary is strong, both on the local and the national level. The Federal Bar Association is fortunate to count almost 90 percent of all federal judges as members. As a member-driven organization, judges are an integral part of all the activities of the Association from serving on the national board of directors to serving as a member of the board or president of a local chapter. The ability for judges, public and private federal practitioners, and federal agencies to network and work together make for a stronger federal system. As one chief district judge said not long ago, “the Federal Bar Association is a perfect organization for federal judges.”

Q: the FBA has been a vocal pro-ponent for adequate funding of the Judiciary and the creation of new judgeships. why do delays in resolving these issues and cuts to Judiciary person-nel and budget concern your members?

A: The delays in resolving these issues and cuts to Judiciary personnel and budget concern our members because

the capacity of the circuit and district courts to function at their optimal and authorized strength is being undermined. This, in turn, creates detrimental delays in the effective and prompt administration of justice. These delays cause unnec-essary hardship and increased costs for individuals and businesses with cases pending in the federal courts.

The Federal Bar Association continues to work through our Government Relations Committee (GRC) to ensure adequate funding for the courts. Many hours have been spent on issues such as judicial pay, courthouse funding, court operations, and new judgeships. We have worked with many Congresses on the issue of judicial appointments. Even before the crisis in judicial vacancies, many courts were experiencing larger caseloads that continually underscored the need for new judges to lighten the load and keep the efficiency of the courts at an acceptable level.

Because so much of the federal courts’ operating budget is absorbed by personnel costs, significant budget cuts for the federal courts could result in recommendations for job furloughs and reductions in court personnel. We believe this would be an unacceptable outcome. The federal court system is bursting at the seams already. With 12 percent of Article III judgeships vacant, no new judgeships in sight, caseloads at record numbers in some courts, and more courts in emergency crisis mode than in the history of the federal court system, this creates a crisis in the Third Branch of government.

Q: In his 2010 Year-End Report, Chief Justice John roberts urged the political branches to find a long-term solution to the problem of judicial vacancies in critically overworked districts. How do long-standing judicial vacancies affect your members?

A: The Federal Bar Association’s mission is to strengthen the federal legal system and the administration of justice by serving the interests and needs of the federal practitioner, the federal Judiciary, and the public they serve. We are waging a grass-roots campaign to reduce the number of judicial vacancies in our federal courts and FBA leaders at all levels—national, circuit, and chapter—have participated in the campaign.

The FBA has called upon the President, Senate leadership, and members of the Senate Judiciary Committee of both parties to hasten their work on judicial confirma-tions to assure that nominees who have

Ashley Belleau, National FBA President

FBA On Mission to Strengthen Federal Legal System

The Third Branch n February 2011 11

been favorably reported out of the Senate are assured a prompt up-or-down vote in the Senate. The Association has also encouraged the President to promptly nominate qualified nominees. As a matter of policy, the FBA takes no position on the credentials or qualifications of specific nominees to the federal bench. Such action will ultimately reduce the number of vacancies to a more tolerable level.

The FBA will remain engaged on this important issue. To advance public understanding of the vacancies issue, the FBA cosponsored with the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C, on February 28, a seminar focused on the judicial nominations and confirmations process, how it can work better, and what may lie ahead.

Q: the Judiciary works closely with the U.S. Marshals Service to safeguard the federal courts. Do your members feel enough is being done to ensure their security as they work in federal courthouses?

A: Attention to courthouse security has long been an important issue for the FBA to assure that federal judges remain safe and free of fear to render justice fairly and swiftly. The FBA played a meaningful role in the enactment of the Court Security Improvement Act of 2007, which expended security protection for federal judges, court personnel, and court operations generally.

The federal Judiciary clearly needs to have adequate, secure modern facilities to carry out its responsibilities for admin-istering justice and ensuring the safety of all participants in the judicial process. The Federal Bar Association was at the forefront of this issue after Judge Lefkow’s family members were killed in Chicago.

We believed then, and believe now, that courthouse security is one of the most important issues we have on our plate.

Recent events in Tucson beg the question, “How much security is enough?” We continue to look to the U.S. Marshals Service and the courts for the answer. The FBA is committed to supporting legislation and funding that insures security for our courthouses, judges, court personnel, attorneys, and the public they all serve.

Q: Following Supreme Court deci-sions in Blakely v. Washington and U.S. v. Booker and Fanfan, federal judges have more flex-ibility in sentencing under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. How have these changes in fed-eral sentencing generally been viewed by your members?

A: These changes in federal sentencing guidelines generally have been positively viewed by our members. Equity and flexibility are most important to any sentencing guidelines. These decisions give judges more flexibility. Further, recent legislation has addressed equity questions. Whether we are talking about sentencing guidelines, judicial pay, vacant judgeships, new judgeships, or funding the courts, the FBA is vigilant

at preserving the independence of the judiciary. Our founders established an independent Judiciary in the Consti-tution, and it is our obligation to protect and preserve the independence of the Third Branch of government.

Q: what are your personal goals as FBA President this year?

A: One of my personal goals is to use the theme of Visibility, Relevance, and Value to achieve a net membership growth of 3 percent. Visibility and Relevance are integral parts of growing and solidi-fying the FBA as the premier bar associ-ation serving federal practitioners and the judiciary. In order to accomplish the VRV vision, the FBA is offering and highlighting additional activities and CLEs at the section, division, and chapter levels, more national CLEs, continue to enhance its new, vibrant web site, and increase communications with FBA members via e-mail and other media.

The FBA is relevant because its members, federal lawyers and judges, work together to promote the sound administration of justice and integrity, quality and independence of the Judiciary. The FBA provides opportu-nities for scholarship and for judges and lawyers to professionally and socially interact. Our Government Relations Committee continues to monitor and often advocates on federal issues that impact the practice of federal lawyers and the courts and keeps our members abreast of current federal issues. The FBA also promotes high standards of profes-sional competence and ethical conduct.

The FBA’s relevance is perhaps best demonstrated by its sponsorship of important “Bench and Bar” events, continuing legal education, and social

See Interview on page 12

“The FBA has called upon the President, Senate

leadership, and members of the Senate Judiciary

Committee of both parties to hasten their work on judicial confirmations…”

FIRST CLASS MAILPOSTAGE & FEES

PAIDU.S. COURTS

PERMIT NO. G-18

FIRST CLASS

Administrative Office of the U.S. CourtsOffice of Public AffairsOne Columbus Circle, N.E.Washington, D.C. 20544

OFFICIAL BUSINESSPENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $300

events. These events focus on issues relevant to federal practitioners and the Judiciary and provide an important bridge between federal judges and the attorneys who practice before them. Being a member of the FBA provides the oppor-tunity for an ongoing dialogue between the federal bench and bar and networking opportunities between practitioners.

One such Bench-Bar event was held in January when we reached out to our

Central District of California Judiciary members in Los Angeles. We had a face-to-face meeting with the bench and a frank dialogue regarding the critical issues facing the Judiciary. My goal is to have more such meetings. We have planned a similar Bench-Bar meeting in NYC in June.

Another one of my personal goals is to highlight the judicial vacancy situation with the President, our Senators, and the public. We are arranging one-on-one meetings

with Senators and others to urge them to take more proactive action in resolving this back-log of judicial vacancies.

The FBA continues to be dedicated to the preservation of judicial indepen-dence, adequate funding and facilities for the federal courts, sufficient numbers of federal judgeships, equitable compen-sation for the federal Judiciary, fairness and consistency in federal sentencing, and a host of other matters.

INtErvIEw continued from page 11