SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 5
Download to read offline
SEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FILING CHECKLIST
     NOTE: Items 1-2 are in Monospaced type and items 3-30 are in
     Proportional type.

1. The docketing fee, if applicable, must be paid. Cir. R.3(b).

2. Lead counsel must be admitted to practice before the Seventh
   Circuit within thirty days of docketing. See Cir. R. 46. Attorneys
   for any federal, state or local government office or agency may
   appear in connection with their official duties without being
   admitted to practice before the court.

3.   All briefs and rehearings must be filed electronically. See Cir. R. 25 and ECF
     Procedures. The electronic version must be in Portable Document Format (PDF)
     generated by printing to PDF from the original word processing file. See ECF User
     Manual pages 4-5, Common Terms.

4.   Paper copies are also required for a brief, appendix, rehearing and answer. The court
     requires 15 copies of a brief or petition for rehearing, 10 copies of a separate appendix
     and 30 copies of a petition for rehearing enbanc. See ECF Procedures a(4) and h(2).

5.   Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(2) requires that the front cover contain:

      a) The number of the case and any consolidated case still pending at the time of filing,
         centered at the top;

      b) The name of the court;

      c) The title of the case (see Cir. R. 12(a)):

      d) The nature of the proceeding (e.g. Appeal, Petition for Review, etc.) and the name of
         the court, agency or board below; the name of the judge magistrate judge or ALJ
         below.

      e) The title of the brief identifying the party or parties for whom the brief is filed (e.g.
         Brief of Appellant, Brief of Appellee (if separate briefs of appellants or appellees are
         being filed, name the individual on the cover of the brief); and

      f) The name, address and telephone number(s) of counsel representing the party or
         parties for whom the brief is filed.

6. The brief must be timely filed. Fed. R. App. P. 31(a) and Cir. R. 31(a) and ECF User
   Manual page 8, Filing Complete at Date and Time Shown on NDA.

7. Any record withdrawn must be returned. Cir. R. 11(d).

8. The brief should be clearly readable and the page size, margin and spacing requirements
   must be adhered to. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(4). Rule 32(a)(5) allows either proportionally
   spaced or monospaced type. Proportional type must include serifs for text and footnotes
SEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FILING CHECKLIST


   but sans-serif type may be used for headings and captions. Proportional type must be 12
   points or larger (footnotes 11 points or larger). Cir. R. 32(b). Monospaced type may not
   contain more than 10.5 characters per inch. The typed matter must be set in plain
   roman style although italics or boldface may be used for emphasis and case names must
   be italicized or underlined. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(6). This type size rule applies to briefs,
   petitions, answers, motions and responses. Fed. R. App. P. 32.

9. Text in a brief, appendix, petition, and answer must be reproduced with a clarity that
   equals or exceeds the output of a laser printer. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(1)(B).

10. The appellant’s or petitioner’s opening brief must contain, under appropriate headings
   and in the order indicated, the following eleven sections indicated in Fed. R. App. P.
   28(a);

   a. A Disclosure Statement, which must be updated if the information contained in it
      changes. If updated, it should be entitled an "Amended Disclosure statement."
      Fed R. App. P. 26.1; Cir. R. 26.1; Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(1).

   b. A table of contents; with page references. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(2).

   c. A table of authorities/cases (alphabetically-arranged), statutes and other authorities
      with references to pages where they are cited in the brief. Fed. R. App. P.28(a)(3).

   d. A complete jurisdictional statement which complies with Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(4) and
      Cir. R. 28(a). Counsel must consult these rules as they have very specific and
      detailed requirements.

      (i) The appellee must provide a statement that the appellant's jurisdictional
      statement is "complete and correct." If the appellant's jurisdictional statement is not
      complete and correct, the appellee must provide, in full, a complete and correct
      jurisdictional statement. Merely pointing out an error in the appellant’s
      jurisdictional statement is not sufficient. Cir. R. 28(b). United States v. Naud, 830
      F.2d 768 (7th Cir. 1987) (The appellee is advised to state that the appellant's
      jurisdictional statement is not complete and correct). Also see Practitioner’s
      Handbook.

   e. A statement of issues presented for review. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(5).

   f. The brief must contain a statement of the case briefly indicating the nature of the
      case, the course of proceedings, and the disposition below. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(6).

   g. The brief must contain a statement of the facts relevant to the issues submitted for
      review, with appropriate references to the record. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(7) and 28(e);
      Cir. R. 28(c).

   h. A summary of argument, which must contain a succinct, clear, and accurate
SEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FILING CHECKLIST


      statement of the arguments made in the body of the brief, and which must not
      merely repeat the argument headings. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8).

   i. An argument which must contain: Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9)

      (1) appellant’s contentions and the reasons for them, with citations to the authorities
      and parts of the record on which the appellant relies; and

      (2) for each issue, a concise statement of the applicable standard of review
      (which may appear in the discussion of the issue or under a separate heading placed
      before the discussion of the issue). Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9)(B). If the appellee
      disagrees, the appellee should set forth its contention as to the correct standard of
      review in its brief. Fed. R. App. P. 28(b).

   j. A short conclusion stating the precise relief sought with electronic signature. Fed. R.
      App. P. 28(a)(10).

   k. A certificate of compliance with the length requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7), if
      required. [also see item # 13 of this checklist].

11. There must be a certificate of service. Fed. R. App. P. 25(d).

12. The color of the cover of paper copies must be as follows: Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(2).

   Appellant's Brief - BLUE

   Separate Appendix - WHITE - (10 copies required; no page limitation.)

   Appellee's Brief - RED

   Appellant's Reply Brief - GRAY

   Appellant/Cross-Appellee's Combined Reply/Responsive Brief - YELLOW

   Intervenor Brief - GREEN

   Amicus Curiae - GREEN - (limited to 15 pages or 7000 words.)

   Supplemental Brief - TAN

   Any Petition For Rehearing (Or Answer, By Order) - WHITE

13. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7) requires principal briefs not exceed 30 pages unless it contains
    no more than the greater of 14,000 words or 1,300 lines of text if a monospaced face is
    used. Reply briefs must contain no more than half of the type volume specified in Rule
    32(a)(7)(B)(i). Briefs submitted under this section of the rule requires a certificate of
SEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FILING CHECKLIST


    compliance that the brief complies with the volume limitations. NOTE TO USERS OF
    MICROSOFT WORD – Be advised that the word counting feature of some versions of
    Microsoft Word may not properly count words in footnotes. Counsel must assure that
    they count all words in the brief before certifying compliance with Rule 32. See DeSilva
    v. DiLeonardi, 185 F.3d 815 (7th Cir. 1999). Briefs less than 30 pages do not require a
    certificate of compliance. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(c).

14. The brief must be within the volume limitations. Oversize briefs are rarely allowed and
    only with prior leave of the court. An oversize brief should not be submitted without
    prior order of the court. Fleming v. County of Kane, 855 F.2d 496 (7th Cir. 1988).


15. The appellant's or petitioner's main (opening) brief must contain, attached to the brief,
    a "required short appendix." See Circuit Rules 30(a) and (b).

16. Appellant’s brief must contain counsel’s affirmative statement that all materials
    required by Cir. R. 30(a) & (b) are included in the appendix. Cir. R. 30(d). False
    certificate under Rule 30(d) is sufficient reason for substantial fines or summary
    affirmance. United States v. Rogers, 270 F.3d 1076, 1084 (7th Cir. 2001); In re: Mix,
    Disciplinary Case D-134, 901 F.2d 143 (7th Cir. 1990); Mortell v. Mortell, 887 F.2d 1322
    (7th Cir. 1989).

17. Being an appellee on one aspect of the case (as in a cross-appeal) does not eliminate the
    need to perform an appellant's duties under Circuit Rules 30(a), (b), (c), and (d), United
    States v. White, 888 F.2d 490 (7th Cir. 1989), regarding the party’s own appeal.

18. The appendix must not contain copies which have notations or underlining on
    documents or court opinions, Allen v. Seidman, 881 F.2d 375, 381 (7th Cir. 1989), and
    generally should not contain fax copies of documents. Two sided copies of documents
    should not be inserted in an appendix. All documents must be on single sided copies.
    Fed. R. App. P. 32 (b)

19. The appendix must not contain the Presentence Investigation (PSI). Although counsel
    may have a copy in their possession, the material is confidential and should not be
    duplicated. Counsel should ascertain if the original sealed PSI has been transmitted to
    the court as part of the record on appeal.

20. Filing briefs or appendices "under seal" is not generally favored and is allowed only
    with prior leave of court. If allowed, parties must file public briefs but may add sealed
    supplements if the motion to file under seal is granted. In The Matter Of Grand Jury
    Proceedings: Victor Krynicki, 983 F.2d 74 (7th Cir. 1992).

21. If determination of the issues presented requires the study of statutes, rules,
    regulations, etc. or relevant parts thereof, they shall be reproduced in the brief or in the
    appendix.
SEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FILING CHECKLIST


22. If you are filing an ANDERS brief, it must be accompanied by a separate motion to
    withdraw and should include the prisoner's identification number as well as his/her
    place of incarceration. Cir. R. 51(b).


23. Briefs of Amicus Curiae must comply with the above requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32
    as well as the additional requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 29 and must avoid
    unnecessary repetition.

24. If pertinent and significant authorities come to a party's attention after the party's brief
    has been filed-or after oral argument but before decision-a party may promptly advise
    the circuit clerk by electronic filing, serving all other parties, setting forth the citations.
    The letter must state the reasons for the supplemental citations, referring either to the
    page of the brief or to a point argued orally. The body of the letter must not exceed 350
    words. Any response must be made promptly and must be similarly limited. Citations
    of supplemental authority require an original and ten copies of the authority and
    accompanying letter. Counsel may not cite or discuss a case at oral argument unless the
    case has been cited in one of the briefs or drawn to the attention of the court and
    opposing counsel by filing under Fed. R. App. P. 28(j). The filing may be made on the
    day of oral argument, if absolutely necessary, but should be made sooner. See Cir. R.
    34(g).

25. A petition for rehearing en banc must contain the required statement at the beginning
    of the petition why the appeal is of exceptional importance or with what decision of the
    United States Supreme Court, the Seventh Circuit or another court of appeals the
    panel decision is claimed to be in conflict. Fed. R. App. P. 35(b).

26. A Petition for Rehearing en Banc must include a disclosure statement. Cir. R. 35.

NOTE: Although every effort is made to keep this checklist current, counsel are
encouraged to contact the clerk’s office with any questions or concerns. Counsel
are also advised that a draft brief may be sent to the Clerk's Office via email at
ca07_frontdesk@ca7.uscourts.gov for review prior to duplication. Local Counsel
may also bring a hard copy to the Clerk’s Office for review.

Rev. 01/13 AK

More Related Content

Similar to Brief filing checklist in the 7th circuit

Perfecting your appeal 9th circuit
Perfecting your appeal   9th circuitPerfecting your appeal   9th circuit
Perfecting your appeal 9th circuitUmesh Heendeniya
 
Criminal Cases New Objections
Criminal Cases New Objections Criminal Cases New Objections
Criminal Cases New Objections Satish Mishra
 
Nclt(amendment)rules latest one 2016 dec
Nclt(amendment)rules latest one 2016 dec Nclt(amendment)rules latest one 2016 dec
Nclt(amendment)rules latest one 2016 dec GAURAV KR SHARMA
 
Savantage Financial Services
Savantage Financial Services Savantage Financial Services
Savantage Financial Services Bryan Johnson
 
Sequoia Global.pdf
Sequoia Global.pdfSequoia Global.pdf
Sequoia Global.pdfVipananLab
 
Bluebook_Guide 20th_ed.ppt
Bluebook_Guide  20th_ed.pptBluebook_Guide  20th_ed.ppt
Bluebook_Guide 20th_ed.pptDanishChandra
 
Ethics and Information Management Using Campbellsville Univers.docx
Ethics and Information Management Using Campbellsville Univers.docxEthics and Information Management Using Campbellsville Univers.docx
Ethics and Information Management Using Campbellsville Univers.docxSANSKAR20
 
Credit given for all answers
Credit given for all answersCredit given for all answers
Credit given for all answersLeon Li
 
TTAB Benjamin & Bros.pdf
TTAB Benjamin & Bros.pdfTTAB Benjamin & Bros.pdf
TTAB Benjamin & Bros.pdfMike Keyes
 

Similar to Brief filing checklist in the 7th circuit (14)

Sample interoffice memo
Sample interoffice memoSample interoffice memo
Sample interoffice memo
 
Sample interoffice memo
Sample interoffice memoSample interoffice memo
Sample interoffice memo
 
Perfecting your appeal 9th circuit
Perfecting your appeal   9th circuitPerfecting your appeal   9th circuit
Perfecting your appeal 9th circuit
 
Criminal Cases New Objections
Criminal Cases New Objections Criminal Cases New Objections
Criminal Cases New Objections
 
Nclt(amendment)rules latest one 2016 dec
Nclt(amendment)rules latest one 2016 dec Nclt(amendment)rules latest one 2016 dec
Nclt(amendment)rules latest one 2016 dec
 
Savantage Financial Services
Savantage Financial Services Savantage Financial Services
Savantage Financial Services
 
Sequoia Global.pdf
Sequoia Global.pdfSequoia Global.pdf
Sequoia Global.pdf
 
Bluebook_Guide 20th_ed.ppt
Bluebook_Guide  20th_ed.pptBluebook_Guide  20th_ed.ppt
Bluebook_Guide 20th_ed.ppt
 
Ethics and Information Management Using Campbellsville Univers.docx
Ethics and Information Management Using Campbellsville Univers.docxEthics and Information Management Using Campbellsville Univers.docx
Ethics and Information Management Using Campbellsville Univers.docx
 
Credit given for all answers
Credit given for all answersCredit given for all answers
Credit given for all answers
 
TTAB Benjamin & Bros.pdf
TTAB Benjamin & Bros.pdfTTAB Benjamin & Bros.pdf
TTAB Benjamin & Bros.pdf
 
Patent registaration
Patent registarationPatent registaration
Patent registaration
 
MIT Pune
MIT PuneMIT Pune
MIT Pune
 
ALWD to Bluebook
ALWD to Bluebook ALWD to Bluebook
ALWD to Bluebook
 

More from Umesh Heendeniya

USA vs. Dr. Hossein Lahiji, Attorney Najmeh Vahid Dastjerdi - Oregon Federal ...
USA vs. Dr. Hossein Lahiji, Attorney Najmeh Vahid Dastjerdi - Oregon Federal ...USA vs. Dr. Hossein Lahiji, Attorney Najmeh Vahid Dastjerdi - Oregon Federal ...
USA vs. Dr. Hossein Lahiji, Attorney Najmeh Vahid Dastjerdi - Oregon Federal ...Umesh Heendeniya
 
Radcliffe v. Experian - Class action representatives' conflict of interest
Radcliffe v. Experian - Class action representatives' conflict of interestRadcliffe v. Experian - Class action representatives' conflict of interest
Radcliffe v. Experian - Class action representatives' conflict of interestUmesh Heendeniya
 
James Carmody v. Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners
James Carmody v. Kansas City Board of Police CommissionersJames Carmody v. Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners
James Carmody v. Kansas City Board of Police CommissionersUmesh Heendeniya
 
Jennifer Westendorf v. West Coast Contractors of Nevada
Jennifer Westendorf v. West Coast Contractors of NevadaJennifer Westendorf v. West Coast Contractors of Nevada
Jennifer Westendorf v. West Coast Contractors of NevadaUmesh Heendeniya
 
Gatto v. United Air Lines, Inc. - Spoliation Instruction in Facebook Account ...
Gatto v. United Air Lines, Inc. - Spoliation Instruction in Facebook Account ...Gatto v. United Air Lines, Inc. - Spoliation Instruction in Facebook Account ...
Gatto v. United Air Lines, Inc. - Spoliation Instruction in Facebook Account ...Umesh Heendeniya
 
EEOC v. Wedco, Inc. - Racial Harassment Lawsuit.
EEOC v. Wedco, Inc. - Racial Harassment Lawsuit.EEOC v. Wedco, Inc. - Racial Harassment Lawsuit.
EEOC v. Wedco, Inc. - Racial Harassment Lawsuit.Umesh Heendeniya
 
Libor Lawsuit - In Re _ LIBOR Antitrust Litigation vs. Bank of America, JPMor...
Libor Lawsuit - In Re _ LIBOR Antitrust Litigation vs. Bank of America, JPMor...Libor Lawsuit - In Re _ LIBOR Antitrust Litigation vs. Bank of America, JPMor...
Libor Lawsuit - In Re _ LIBOR Antitrust Litigation vs. Bank of America, JPMor...Umesh Heendeniya
 
Estate of Carlos Centeno, deceased v. Raani Corporation, Rashid A. Chaudary, ...
Estate of Carlos Centeno, deceased v. Raani Corporation, Rashid A. Chaudary, ...Estate of Carlos Centeno, deceased v. Raani Corporation, Rashid A. Chaudary, ...
Estate of Carlos Centeno, deceased v. Raani Corporation, Rashid A. Chaudary, ...Umesh Heendeniya
 
AllState Sweeping v. Calvin Black, City and County of Denver.
AllState Sweeping v. Calvin Black, City and County of Denver.AllState Sweeping v. Calvin Black, City and County of Denver.
AllState Sweeping v. Calvin Black, City and County of Denver.Umesh Heendeniya
 
Boston Police Officers' Cocaine Drug Testing Appeals Overturned by State Boar...
Boston Police Officers' Cocaine Drug Testing Appeals Overturned by State Boar...Boston Police Officers' Cocaine Drug Testing Appeals Overturned by State Boar...
Boston Police Officers' Cocaine Drug Testing Appeals Overturned by State Boar...Umesh Heendeniya
 
Rob Lowe and Sheryl Lowe v. Laura Boyce and Does 1 through 100 - Lawsuit Agai...
Rob Lowe and Sheryl Lowe v. Laura Boyce and Does 1 through 100 - Lawsuit Agai...Rob Lowe and Sheryl Lowe v. Laura Boyce and Does 1 through 100 - Lawsuit Agai...
Rob Lowe and Sheryl Lowe v. Laura Boyce and Does 1 through 100 - Lawsuit Agai...Umesh Heendeniya
 
Steven Wittels v. David Sanford and Jeremy Heisler - Lawsuit complaint
Steven Wittels v. David Sanford and Jeremy Heisler - Lawsuit complaintSteven Wittels v. David Sanford and Jeremy Heisler - Lawsuit complaint
Steven Wittels v. David Sanford and Jeremy Heisler - Lawsuit complaintUmesh Heendeniya
 
Knives and the Second Amendment, by David Kopel, Esq
Knives and the Second Amendment, by David Kopel, EsqKnives and the Second Amendment, by David Kopel, Esq
Knives and the Second Amendment, by David Kopel, EsqUmesh Heendeniya
 
Linda Eagle v. Sandi Morgan, Haitham Saead, Joseph Mellaci, Elizabeth Sweeney...
Linda Eagle v. Sandi Morgan, Haitham Saead, Joseph Mellaci, Elizabeth Sweeney...Linda Eagle v. Sandi Morgan, Haitham Saead, Joseph Mellaci, Elizabeth Sweeney...
Linda Eagle v. Sandi Morgan, Haitham Saead, Joseph Mellaci, Elizabeth Sweeney...Umesh Heendeniya
 
Estate of Andrew Lee Scott vs. Richard Sylvester, et al - Lake County Wrongfu...
Estate of Andrew Lee Scott vs. Richard Sylvester, et al - Lake County Wrongfu...Estate of Andrew Lee Scott vs. Richard Sylvester, et al - Lake County Wrongfu...
Estate of Andrew Lee Scott vs. Richard Sylvester, et al - Lake County Wrongfu...Umesh Heendeniya
 
State-by-State Guide to Laws on Taping Phone Calls and Conversations, by Repo...
State-by-State Guide to Laws on Taping Phone Calls and Conversations, by Repo...State-by-State Guide to Laws on Taping Phone Calls and Conversations, by Repo...
State-by-State Guide to Laws on Taping Phone Calls and Conversations, by Repo...Umesh Heendeniya
 
Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...
Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...
Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...Umesh Heendeniya
 
Brunson and Thompson vs. Michael Dunn - Lawsuit by surviving Afro-American te...
Brunson and Thompson vs. Michael Dunn - Lawsuit by surviving Afro-American te...Brunson and Thompson vs. Michael Dunn - Lawsuit by surviving Afro-American te...
Brunson and Thompson vs. Michael Dunn - Lawsuit by surviving Afro-American te...Umesh Heendeniya
 
Jordan Davis vs. Michael Dunn - Wrongful death lawsuit filed by Afro-American...
Jordan Davis vs. Michael Dunn - Wrongful death lawsuit filed by Afro-American...Jordan Davis vs. Michael Dunn - Wrongful death lawsuit filed by Afro-American...
Jordan Davis vs. Michael Dunn - Wrongful death lawsuit filed by Afro-American...Umesh Heendeniya
 
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 - Police have no duty to protect c...
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 - Police have no duty to protect c...Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 - Police have no duty to protect c...
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 - Police have no duty to protect c...Umesh Heendeniya
 

More from Umesh Heendeniya (20)

USA vs. Dr. Hossein Lahiji, Attorney Najmeh Vahid Dastjerdi - Oregon Federal ...
USA vs. Dr. Hossein Lahiji, Attorney Najmeh Vahid Dastjerdi - Oregon Federal ...USA vs. Dr. Hossein Lahiji, Attorney Najmeh Vahid Dastjerdi - Oregon Federal ...
USA vs. Dr. Hossein Lahiji, Attorney Najmeh Vahid Dastjerdi - Oregon Federal ...
 
Radcliffe v. Experian - Class action representatives' conflict of interest
Radcliffe v. Experian - Class action representatives' conflict of interestRadcliffe v. Experian - Class action representatives' conflict of interest
Radcliffe v. Experian - Class action representatives' conflict of interest
 
James Carmody v. Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners
James Carmody v. Kansas City Board of Police CommissionersJames Carmody v. Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners
James Carmody v. Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners
 
Jennifer Westendorf v. West Coast Contractors of Nevada
Jennifer Westendorf v. West Coast Contractors of NevadaJennifer Westendorf v. West Coast Contractors of Nevada
Jennifer Westendorf v. West Coast Contractors of Nevada
 
Gatto v. United Air Lines, Inc. - Spoliation Instruction in Facebook Account ...
Gatto v. United Air Lines, Inc. - Spoliation Instruction in Facebook Account ...Gatto v. United Air Lines, Inc. - Spoliation Instruction in Facebook Account ...
Gatto v. United Air Lines, Inc. - Spoliation Instruction in Facebook Account ...
 
EEOC v. Wedco, Inc. - Racial Harassment Lawsuit.
EEOC v. Wedco, Inc. - Racial Harassment Lawsuit.EEOC v. Wedco, Inc. - Racial Harassment Lawsuit.
EEOC v. Wedco, Inc. - Racial Harassment Lawsuit.
 
Libor Lawsuit - In Re _ LIBOR Antitrust Litigation vs. Bank of America, JPMor...
Libor Lawsuit - In Re _ LIBOR Antitrust Litigation vs. Bank of America, JPMor...Libor Lawsuit - In Re _ LIBOR Antitrust Litigation vs. Bank of America, JPMor...
Libor Lawsuit - In Re _ LIBOR Antitrust Litigation vs. Bank of America, JPMor...
 
Estate of Carlos Centeno, deceased v. Raani Corporation, Rashid A. Chaudary, ...
Estate of Carlos Centeno, deceased v. Raani Corporation, Rashid A. Chaudary, ...Estate of Carlos Centeno, deceased v. Raani Corporation, Rashid A. Chaudary, ...
Estate of Carlos Centeno, deceased v. Raani Corporation, Rashid A. Chaudary, ...
 
AllState Sweeping v. Calvin Black, City and County of Denver.
AllState Sweeping v. Calvin Black, City and County of Denver.AllState Sweeping v. Calvin Black, City and County of Denver.
AllState Sweeping v. Calvin Black, City and County of Denver.
 
Boston Police Officers' Cocaine Drug Testing Appeals Overturned by State Boar...
Boston Police Officers' Cocaine Drug Testing Appeals Overturned by State Boar...Boston Police Officers' Cocaine Drug Testing Appeals Overturned by State Boar...
Boston Police Officers' Cocaine Drug Testing Appeals Overturned by State Boar...
 
Rob Lowe and Sheryl Lowe v. Laura Boyce and Does 1 through 100 - Lawsuit Agai...
Rob Lowe and Sheryl Lowe v. Laura Boyce and Does 1 through 100 - Lawsuit Agai...Rob Lowe and Sheryl Lowe v. Laura Boyce and Does 1 through 100 - Lawsuit Agai...
Rob Lowe and Sheryl Lowe v. Laura Boyce and Does 1 through 100 - Lawsuit Agai...
 
Steven Wittels v. David Sanford and Jeremy Heisler - Lawsuit complaint
Steven Wittels v. David Sanford and Jeremy Heisler - Lawsuit complaintSteven Wittels v. David Sanford and Jeremy Heisler - Lawsuit complaint
Steven Wittels v. David Sanford and Jeremy Heisler - Lawsuit complaint
 
Knives and the Second Amendment, by David Kopel, Esq
Knives and the Second Amendment, by David Kopel, EsqKnives and the Second Amendment, by David Kopel, Esq
Knives and the Second Amendment, by David Kopel, Esq
 
Linda Eagle v. Sandi Morgan, Haitham Saead, Joseph Mellaci, Elizabeth Sweeney...
Linda Eagle v. Sandi Morgan, Haitham Saead, Joseph Mellaci, Elizabeth Sweeney...Linda Eagle v. Sandi Morgan, Haitham Saead, Joseph Mellaci, Elizabeth Sweeney...
Linda Eagle v. Sandi Morgan, Haitham Saead, Joseph Mellaci, Elizabeth Sweeney...
 
Estate of Andrew Lee Scott vs. Richard Sylvester, et al - Lake County Wrongfu...
Estate of Andrew Lee Scott vs. Richard Sylvester, et al - Lake County Wrongfu...Estate of Andrew Lee Scott vs. Richard Sylvester, et al - Lake County Wrongfu...
Estate of Andrew Lee Scott vs. Richard Sylvester, et al - Lake County Wrongfu...
 
State-by-State Guide to Laws on Taping Phone Calls and Conversations, by Repo...
State-by-State Guide to Laws on Taping Phone Calls and Conversations, by Repo...State-by-State Guide to Laws on Taping Phone Calls and Conversations, by Repo...
State-by-State Guide to Laws on Taping Phone Calls and Conversations, by Repo...
 
Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...
Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...
Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...
 
Brunson and Thompson vs. Michael Dunn - Lawsuit by surviving Afro-American te...
Brunson and Thompson vs. Michael Dunn - Lawsuit by surviving Afro-American te...Brunson and Thompson vs. Michael Dunn - Lawsuit by surviving Afro-American te...
Brunson and Thompson vs. Michael Dunn - Lawsuit by surviving Afro-American te...
 
Jordan Davis vs. Michael Dunn - Wrongful death lawsuit filed by Afro-American...
Jordan Davis vs. Michael Dunn - Wrongful death lawsuit filed by Afro-American...Jordan Davis vs. Michael Dunn - Wrongful death lawsuit filed by Afro-American...
Jordan Davis vs. Michael Dunn - Wrongful death lawsuit filed by Afro-American...
 
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 - Police have no duty to protect c...
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 - Police have no duty to protect c...Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 - Police have no duty to protect c...
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 - Police have no duty to protect c...
 

Recently uploaded

E J Waggoner against Kellogg's Pantheism 8.pptx
E J Waggoner against Kellogg's Pantheism 8.pptxE J Waggoner against Kellogg's Pantheism 8.pptx
E J Waggoner against Kellogg's Pantheism 8.pptxJackieSparrow3
 
Module-2-Lesson-2-COMMUNICATION-AIDS-AND-STRATEGIES-USING-TOOLS-OF-TECHNOLOGY...
Module-2-Lesson-2-COMMUNICATION-AIDS-AND-STRATEGIES-USING-TOOLS-OF-TECHNOLOGY...Module-2-Lesson-2-COMMUNICATION-AIDS-AND-STRATEGIES-USING-TOOLS-OF-TECHNOLOGY...
Module-2-Lesson-2-COMMUNICATION-AIDS-AND-STRATEGIES-USING-TOOLS-OF-TECHNOLOGY...JeylaisaManabat1
 
(南达科他州立大学毕业证学位证成绩单-永久存档)
(南达科他州立大学毕业证学位证成绩单-永久存档)(南达科他州立大学毕业证学位证成绩单-永久存档)
(南达科他州立大学毕业证学位证成绩单-永久存档)oannq
 
南新罕布什尔大学毕业证学位证成绩单-学历认证
南新罕布什尔大学毕业证学位证成绩单-学历认证南新罕布什尔大学毕业证学位证成绩单-学历认证
南新罕布什尔大学毕业证学位证成绩单-学历认证kbdhl05e
 
Inspiring Through Words Power of Inspiration.pptx
Inspiring Through Words Power of Inspiration.pptxInspiring Through Words Power of Inspiration.pptx
Inspiring Through Words Power of Inspiration.pptxShubham Rawat
 
Authentic No 1 Amil Baba In Pakistan Amil Baba In Faisalabad Amil Baba In Kar...
Authentic No 1 Amil Baba In Pakistan Amil Baba In Faisalabad Amil Baba In Kar...Authentic No 1 Amil Baba In Pakistan Amil Baba In Faisalabad Amil Baba In Kar...
Authentic No 1 Amil Baba In Pakistan Amil Baba In Faisalabad Amil Baba In Kar...Authentic No 1 Amil Baba In Pakistan
 

Recently uploaded (6)

E J Waggoner against Kellogg's Pantheism 8.pptx
E J Waggoner against Kellogg's Pantheism 8.pptxE J Waggoner against Kellogg's Pantheism 8.pptx
E J Waggoner against Kellogg's Pantheism 8.pptx
 
Module-2-Lesson-2-COMMUNICATION-AIDS-AND-STRATEGIES-USING-TOOLS-OF-TECHNOLOGY...
Module-2-Lesson-2-COMMUNICATION-AIDS-AND-STRATEGIES-USING-TOOLS-OF-TECHNOLOGY...Module-2-Lesson-2-COMMUNICATION-AIDS-AND-STRATEGIES-USING-TOOLS-OF-TECHNOLOGY...
Module-2-Lesson-2-COMMUNICATION-AIDS-AND-STRATEGIES-USING-TOOLS-OF-TECHNOLOGY...
 
(南达科他州立大学毕业证学位证成绩单-永久存档)
(南达科他州立大学毕业证学位证成绩单-永久存档)(南达科他州立大学毕业证学位证成绩单-永久存档)
(南达科他州立大学毕业证学位证成绩单-永久存档)
 
南新罕布什尔大学毕业证学位证成绩单-学历认证
南新罕布什尔大学毕业证学位证成绩单-学历认证南新罕布什尔大学毕业证学位证成绩单-学历认证
南新罕布什尔大学毕业证学位证成绩单-学历认证
 
Inspiring Through Words Power of Inspiration.pptx
Inspiring Through Words Power of Inspiration.pptxInspiring Through Words Power of Inspiration.pptx
Inspiring Through Words Power of Inspiration.pptx
 
Authentic No 1 Amil Baba In Pakistan Amil Baba In Faisalabad Amil Baba In Kar...
Authentic No 1 Amil Baba In Pakistan Amil Baba In Faisalabad Amil Baba In Kar...Authentic No 1 Amil Baba In Pakistan Amil Baba In Faisalabad Amil Baba In Kar...
Authentic No 1 Amil Baba In Pakistan Amil Baba In Faisalabad Amil Baba In Kar...
 

Brief filing checklist in the 7th circuit

  • 1. SEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FILING CHECKLIST NOTE: Items 1-2 are in Monospaced type and items 3-30 are in Proportional type. 1. The docketing fee, if applicable, must be paid. Cir. R.3(b). 2. Lead counsel must be admitted to practice before the Seventh Circuit within thirty days of docketing. See Cir. R. 46. Attorneys for any federal, state or local government office or agency may appear in connection with their official duties without being admitted to practice before the court. 3. All briefs and rehearings must be filed electronically. See Cir. R. 25 and ECF Procedures. The electronic version must be in Portable Document Format (PDF) generated by printing to PDF from the original word processing file. See ECF User Manual pages 4-5, Common Terms. 4. Paper copies are also required for a brief, appendix, rehearing and answer. The court requires 15 copies of a brief or petition for rehearing, 10 copies of a separate appendix and 30 copies of a petition for rehearing enbanc. See ECF Procedures a(4) and h(2). 5. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(2) requires that the front cover contain: a) The number of the case and any consolidated case still pending at the time of filing, centered at the top; b) The name of the court; c) The title of the case (see Cir. R. 12(a)): d) The nature of the proceeding (e.g. Appeal, Petition for Review, etc.) and the name of the court, agency or board below; the name of the judge magistrate judge or ALJ below. e) The title of the brief identifying the party or parties for whom the brief is filed (e.g. Brief of Appellant, Brief of Appellee (if separate briefs of appellants or appellees are being filed, name the individual on the cover of the brief); and f) The name, address and telephone number(s) of counsel representing the party or parties for whom the brief is filed. 6. The brief must be timely filed. Fed. R. App. P. 31(a) and Cir. R. 31(a) and ECF User Manual page 8, Filing Complete at Date and Time Shown on NDA. 7. Any record withdrawn must be returned. Cir. R. 11(d). 8. The brief should be clearly readable and the page size, margin and spacing requirements must be adhered to. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(4). Rule 32(a)(5) allows either proportionally spaced or monospaced type. Proportional type must include serifs for text and footnotes
  • 2. SEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FILING CHECKLIST but sans-serif type may be used for headings and captions. Proportional type must be 12 points or larger (footnotes 11 points or larger). Cir. R. 32(b). Monospaced type may not contain more than 10.5 characters per inch. The typed matter must be set in plain roman style although italics or boldface may be used for emphasis and case names must be italicized or underlined. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(6). This type size rule applies to briefs, petitions, answers, motions and responses. Fed. R. App. P. 32. 9. Text in a brief, appendix, petition, and answer must be reproduced with a clarity that equals or exceeds the output of a laser printer. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(1)(B). 10. The appellant’s or petitioner’s opening brief must contain, under appropriate headings and in the order indicated, the following eleven sections indicated in Fed. R. App. P. 28(a); a. A Disclosure Statement, which must be updated if the information contained in it changes. If updated, it should be entitled an "Amended Disclosure statement." Fed R. App. P. 26.1; Cir. R. 26.1; Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(1). b. A table of contents; with page references. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(2). c. A table of authorities/cases (alphabetically-arranged), statutes and other authorities with references to pages where they are cited in the brief. Fed. R. App. P.28(a)(3). d. A complete jurisdictional statement which complies with Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(4) and Cir. R. 28(a). Counsel must consult these rules as they have very specific and detailed requirements. (i) The appellee must provide a statement that the appellant's jurisdictional statement is "complete and correct." If the appellant's jurisdictional statement is not complete and correct, the appellee must provide, in full, a complete and correct jurisdictional statement. Merely pointing out an error in the appellant’s jurisdictional statement is not sufficient. Cir. R. 28(b). United States v. Naud, 830 F.2d 768 (7th Cir. 1987) (The appellee is advised to state that the appellant's jurisdictional statement is not complete and correct). Also see Practitioner’s Handbook. e. A statement of issues presented for review. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(5). f. The brief must contain a statement of the case briefly indicating the nature of the case, the course of proceedings, and the disposition below. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(6). g. The brief must contain a statement of the facts relevant to the issues submitted for review, with appropriate references to the record. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(7) and 28(e); Cir. R. 28(c). h. A summary of argument, which must contain a succinct, clear, and accurate
  • 3. SEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FILING CHECKLIST statement of the arguments made in the body of the brief, and which must not merely repeat the argument headings. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8). i. An argument which must contain: Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9) (1) appellant’s contentions and the reasons for them, with citations to the authorities and parts of the record on which the appellant relies; and (2) for each issue, a concise statement of the applicable standard of review (which may appear in the discussion of the issue or under a separate heading placed before the discussion of the issue). Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9)(B). If the appellee disagrees, the appellee should set forth its contention as to the correct standard of review in its brief. Fed. R. App. P. 28(b). j. A short conclusion stating the precise relief sought with electronic signature. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(10). k. A certificate of compliance with the length requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7), if required. [also see item # 13 of this checklist]. 11. There must be a certificate of service. Fed. R. App. P. 25(d). 12. The color of the cover of paper copies must be as follows: Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(2). Appellant's Brief - BLUE Separate Appendix - WHITE - (10 copies required; no page limitation.) Appellee's Brief - RED Appellant's Reply Brief - GRAY Appellant/Cross-Appellee's Combined Reply/Responsive Brief - YELLOW Intervenor Brief - GREEN Amicus Curiae - GREEN - (limited to 15 pages or 7000 words.) Supplemental Brief - TAN Any Petition For Rehearing (Or Answer, By Order) - WHITE 13. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7) requires principal briefs not exceed 30 pages unless it contains no more than the greater of 14,000 words or 1,300 lines of text if a monospaced face is used. Reply briefs must contain no more than half of the type volume specified in Rule 32(a)(7)(B)(i). Briefs submitted under this section of the rule requires a certificate of
  • 4. SEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FILING CHECKLIST compliance that the brief complies with the volume limitations. NOTE TO USERS OF MICROSOFT WORD – Be advised that the word counting feature of some versions of Microsoft Word may not properly count words in footnotes. Counsel must assure that they count all words in the brief before certifying compliance with Rule 32. See DeSilva v. DiLeonardi, 185 F.3d 815 (7th Cir. 1999). Briefs less than 30 pages do not require a certificate of compliance. Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(c). 14. The brief must be within the volume limitations. Oversize briefs are rarely allowed and only with prior leave of the court. An oversize brief should not be submitted without prior order of the court. Fleming v. County of Kane, 855 F.2d 496 (7th Cir. 1988). 15. The appellant's or petitioner's main (opening) brief must contain, attached to the brief, a "required short appendix." See Circuit Rules 30(a) and (b). 16. Appellant’s brief must contain counsel’s affirmative statement that all materials required by Cir. R. 30(a) & (b) are included in the appendix. Cir. R. 30(d). False certificate under Rule 30(d) is sufficient reason for substantial fines or summary affirmance. United States v. Rogers, 270 F.3d 1076, 1084 (7th Cir. 2001); In re: Mix, Disciplinary Case D-134, 901 F.2d 143 (7th Cir. 1990); Mortell v. Mortell, 887 F.2d 1322 (7th Cir. 1989). 17. Being an appellee on one aspect of the case (as in a cross-appeal) does not eliminate the need to perform an appellant's duties under Circuit Rules 30(a), (b), (c), and (d), United States v. White, 888 F.2d 490 (7th Cir. 1989), regarding the party’s own appeal. 18. The appendix must not contain copies which have notations or underlining on documents or court opinions, Allen v. Seidman, 881 F.2d 375, 381 (7th Cir. 1989), and generally should not contain fax copies of documents. Two sided copies of documents should not be inserted in an appendix. All documents must be on single sided copies. Fed. R. App. P. 32 (b) 19. The appendix must not contain the Presentence Investigation (PSI). Although counsel may have a copy in their possession, the material is confidential and should not be duplicated. Counsel should ascertain if the original sealed PSI has been transmitted to the court as part of the record on appeal. 20. Filing briefs or appendices "under seal" is not generally favored and is allowed only with prior leave of court. If allowed, parties must file public briefs but may add sealed supplements if the motion to file under seal is granted. In The Matter Of Grand Jury Proceedings: Victor Krynicki, 983 F.2d 74 (7th Cir. 1992). 21. If determination of the issues presented requires the study of statutes, rules, regulations, etc. or relevant parts thereof, they shall be reproduced in the brief or in the appendix.
  • 5. SEVENTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FILING CHECKLIST 22. If you are filing an ANDERS brief, it must be accompanied by a separate motion to withdraw and should include the prisoner's identification number as well as his/her place of incarceration. Cir. R. 51(b). 23. Briefs of Amicus Curiae must comply with the above requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32 as well as the additional requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 29 and must avoid unnecessary repetition. 24. If pertinent and significant authorities come to a party's attention after the party's brief has been filed-or after oral argument but before decision-a party may promptly advise the circuit clerk by electronic filing, serving all other parties, setting forth the citations. The letter must state the reasons for the supplemental citations, referring either to the page of the brief or to a point argued orally. The body of the letter must not exceed 350 words. Any response must be made promptly and must be similarly limited. Citations of supplemental authority require an original and ten copies of the authority and accompanying letter. Counsel may not cite or discuss a case at oral argument unless the case has been cited in one of the briefs or drawn to the attention of the court and opposing counsel by filing under Fed. R. App. P. 28(j). The filing may be made on the day of oral argument, if absolutely necessary, but should be made sooner. See Cir. R. 34(g). 25. A petition for rehearing en banc must contain the required statement at the beginning of the petition why the appeal is of exceptional importance or with what decision of the United States Supreme Court, the Seventh Circuit or another court of appeals the panel decision is claimed to be in conflict. Fed. R. App. P. 35(b). 26. A Petition for Rehearing en Banc must include a disclosure statement. Cir. R. 35. NOTE: Although every effort is made to keep this checklist current, counsel are encouraged to contact the clerk’s office with any questions or concerns. Counsel are also advised that a draft brief may be sent to the Clerk's Office via email at ca07_frontdesk@ca7.uscourts.gov for review prior to duplication. Local Counsel may also bring a hard copy to the Clerk’s Office for review. Rev. 01/13 AK