NINTH CIRCUIT United States Courts 2006 Annual Report

2006 Annual Report Cover.indd 3 08/20/2007 8:55:02 AM Above: Text mural of Article III of the United States Constitution located at the Wayne Lyman Morse Courthouse in Eugene, Oregon. Cover Image: San Francisco courtroom mosaic depicting Justice with Science, Literature and the Arts

The Offi ce of the Circuit Executive would like to acknowledge the following for their contributions to the 2006 Annual Report:

Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder Clerk of Court Cathy Catterson Chief Pretrial Services Offi cer George Walker Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Clerk Harold Marenus

2006 Annual Report Cover.indd 4 08/20/2007 8:55:04 AM Table of Contents

Ninth Circuit Overview

2 Judicial Council Mission Statement 3 Foreword by Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder 5 Ninth Circuit Overview 6 Judicial Council and Administration 8 Organization of Judicial Council Committees

Judicial Transitions

10 New Judges 13 New Senior Judges 14 In Memoriam

Ninth Circuit Highlights

16 Judicial Council Committees 19 2006 Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference 21 Conference Award Presentations 23 Devitt Award Presentation 25 Documentary Film Inspires Law Day Program 26 Ideas Set Forth for Managing Immigration Caseload 28 2006 National Gang Symposium

Space and Facilities

30 Eugene Courthouse Dedicated 30 Space and Security Committee 33 Courthouses in Design Phase

The Work of the Courts

36 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 39 District Courts 43 Bankruptcy Courts 45 Bankruptcy Appellate Panel 47 Magistrate Judge Matters 49 Federal Public Defenders 51 Probation Offi ces 53 Pretrial Services Offi ces 55 District by District Caseloads (All statistics provided by the Administrative Offi ce of the United States Courts)

2006 Annual Report Final.indd Sec1:1 08/20/2007 8:49:04 AM 2 0 0 6

A n 2 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R The JudicialCounciloftheNinthCircuit e p o r t

F i n a l . i n d d

Senior District JudgeTerry District Senior J.Hatter, Jr. Not inphoto:Circuit JudgeAlexKozinski, McLaneWardlaw, Circuit JudgeKim JudgeCharlesR.Breyer, District and top row, JudgeRalphB. Magistrate from left: Kirscher. J.Battaglia,andChiefBankruptcy JudgeAnthony JudgeRogerG.Strand,District JudgeB. ChiefDistrict Lynn Winmill, andCircuit JudgeSusanP. Graber. Standing, R.Thompson.Standing,Circuit JudgeDavid middlerow, from Circuit Senior left: JudgeMarshaS.Berzon, W. JudgeDonald Seated, from ChiefDistrict left: Molloy, M.Schroeder, ChiefCircuit JudgeMary andSenior

S e c 1 : 2 MISSION STATEMENT of, andconfidence inthejudiciary. invidious discrimination,and enhancepublicunderstanding of business,preventanyform effective dischargeofcourt the fairandpromptresolution ofdisputes,ensurethe withinthecircuit.Toof thecourts doso,itwillpromote intheadministration justice andthesafeguardingoffairness theeffectiveandexpeditiousadministrationof support The MissionoftheJudicialCouncilNinthCircuit isto 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 4 9 : 4 6

A M M A

8 4 : 9 4 3 :

Foreword 8

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 lings, lings, partlings plummet, of experienced retain rms and others to ll existing judgeships has been an useful and nd the information led with the court 14.1 percent, by decreased lled. judges selected the district by courts. new magistrate ve rmed by the Senate in relatively rapid fashion. The addition of The fashion. rapid the Senate in relatively rmed by c Island jurisdictions. We hope you fi hope you We c Island jurisdictions. in the district 16.2 lings held steady courts for of the Ninth which accounted Circuit, ve years. Immigration appeals, which had increased 626 percent from 2001 to 2005, were 2005, were 2001 to from 626 percent which had increased Immigration appeals, years. ve eld. One of the more promising ideas to come out of these sessions involves expanded involves out of these sessions come ideas to promising One of the more eld. ederal courtsederal in the among the busiest not only are Ninth Circuit of the often assisted judges and court Our staff, innovative. but also the most nation, F by lawyers and law professors, are continually seeking ways to improve the seeking improve continually to are ways professors, and law lawyers by Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder Judge MaryChief M. FOREWORD 3 rst decline in fi rmed, including Frances Marie Tydingco-Gatewood, the new chief judge of the U.S. District the Court for new chief judge of the U.S. the Tydingco-Gatewood, Marie including Frances rmed, : 1 c e S

ongoing challenge for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and for many district many courts Court the Ninth and for States in Circuit the United of Appeals for for ongoing challenge of our courts judges any new circuit in 2006, two for authorized Although no new judgeships were the circuit. The lack of new judgeships and the slow pace of appointments to fi of appointments to pace and the slow lack of new judgeships The welcome your comments. your welcome administration of justice. The 2006 Ninth Circuit Annual Report Circuit 2006 Ninth The makes of some of these note of justice. administration the important while recapping in the courts and events trends serving western nine efforts, Pacifi and two states mentoring and training opportunities for attorneys who represent immigrant appellants pro bono. We are are We bono. appellants pro immigrant who represent opportunities and training mentoring attorneys for fi law funding from using private which involves hopeful this proposal, were nominated by the president and confi the president by nominated were and Sandra Segal Ikuta the Ninth Court nearly full brought Circuit of Appeals to Smith, Jr., Judges Milan D. judgeships fi 26 of 28 authorized with strength new district judges were Four with nine vacancies. District ending the year courts as well, fare did not confi Tydingco- of Judge appointment The courts system. District territorial in the federal of Guam, one of three indigenous pride stirred descent, was raised on Guam and is of Chamoru and Pohnpeian who Gatewood, to one new judge named new bankruptcy In appointed, addition, four among island residents. judges were and fi Bankruptcy Panel, Appellate the circuit’s the fi fi of new share the largest have to Ninth continued The Circuit before. the year from 22 percent down of the national total. 21.7 percent a big part of new appeals in 2006, will likely remain percent 37.4 for which accounted matters, Immigration expedite to ways the courtfor look to continues the bar, help from With come. to years of our caseload for and asylum seekers. residents appeals while respecting the rights of would-be of immigration the processing in sessions with some of the most knowledgeable attorneys “brainstorming” In 2006, the court sponsored fi the immigration in 2007. will be implemented as mentors/trainers, attorneys Criminal and civil case fi enactment the 2005. linked closely to in late of a bankruptcya national trend law reform in trying persist the may opposition from split the Ninth widespread to Circuit, in Congress While a few The most of our elected it is a bad idea. leaders that convinced have bench, bar and academia appears to the legal community the split was truly remarkable in opposing solidarity by in 2006. Early in the shown active and senior circuit 33 of 47 total judges of the court by signed of appeals published a statement, year, the Senate Judiciary sent to were of opposition letters in the year, division. Later opposing circuit judges, than 80 judges of district more and bankruptcy by signed than Committee courts more and by in the circuit, percent of the total federal court caseload. Our bankruptcy courts, however, saw new fi saw court Our bankruptcy caseload. federal of the total courts,percent however, For the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, 2006 brought a welcome respite from relentless growth in caseload growth relentless from respite a welcome the Ninth Court 2006 brought Circuit of Appeals, For of new appeals fi number The appeals. immigration by driven d d n i . l a n i F

t r o p e R

l a

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 4 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o all, Ithinkyou willfi by ourjudgesandstaff including caseloadstatisticsanddescriptionsofvarious initiatives undertaken You for are invited more information further in2006, to aboutthework perusethisreport ofour courts Wallace’s hometown ofSanDiego. bestowed onafederal judge, waspresented by Justice event Kennedyatacommunity heldinJudge Award Circuit to Senior JudgeJ. Cliff oftheAmericanJudicaturein October Society’s to 2005Edward Justice J. DevittDistinguishedService Noteworthy amongtheaccolades andhonorsreceived by ourjudgesduringtheyear wasthepresentation Southwestern University Law School. sponsored wasaspecialsymposiumintheCentral by District observances Amongtheanniversary districts. ofCalifornia, districts and Southern andreallocated judgeshipstoboundaries oftheNorthern thenew for theCentral ofCalifornia. andEastern districts They were created in1966,whenCongress redrew the oftheestablishmentfederalAmong themilestones courts markedin2006wasthe40thanniversary panels hearingoral arguments thatmonthattheJamesR.Browning U.S. inSanFrancisco. Courthouse of AppealsinOctober, asdidthenot-so-retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who satontwo appellate Huntington Beach.Justice Kennedy, ournewlydesignated circuit justice, Circuit alsovisited Court theNinth Offi Justices Anthony M.KennedyandStephen G.Breyer, alongwiththenewdirector oftheAdministrative amongtheyear’sCertainly highlightswasthepresence Jr., ofChiefJustice JohnG.Roberts, andAssociate thathadoccupiedimplosion ofthestructure theland. ofasite.selection site hasbeenacquiredThe SanDiegocourthouse andwascleared in2006withadramatic the face ofinfl But thecircuit’s inSanDiegoandLos mostcriticalprojects, Angeles, newcourthouses remained onholdin facilitiesinBillings, Coeur Mont., discussions continued d’Alene, onnewcourt Idaho, and Vancouver, Wash. ofAppeals. Circuit Plansalsowere Court the Ninth approved inGreat for Falls, anewcourthouse and Mont., modernization andseismicretrofi of thecity’s plansto revitalize thearea withanew “Courthouse District.” Seattle, work In wasbegunonthe Eugene, Ore., exampleofmodernpublicarchitecture, whichisnotonlyamarvelous butthecornerstone ofspace andfacilities,Speaking we celebrated theopeningof Wayne Lyman U.S. Morse in Courthouse coming andthuslikelyto takesometimeto solve. Administration, asourlandlord. whichserves judicial branchandGeneralServices This isaproblem longin congressional matter andspurred interest newdiscussionsofcost issuesbetween the inthisimportant also were introduced intheHouseandSenate. Althoughneitherbillmoved forward, theyhelpedgenerate late intheyear.uncertainty Billsaimedatreducing thejudiciary’s rent fi costs, anotherimportant Also inthelegislative were realm, to thecourts receive fortunate adequate funding, despite some joined withmeandothersintestifying againstthemeasure. to consider yet anothercircuit-splitting oftheAmericanBarAssociation who bill, itwasthepresident-elect 385 professors from law schoolsaround thecountry. metinSeptember Andwhenthecommittee actually r t

F i ce oftheU.S. JamesC.Duff Courts, n a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 4 ationary cost inBakersfi escalation,andplansfor anewcourthouse ationary nd 2006wasanotherproductive year for Circuit. theNinth tting ofthe William U.S. Kenzo for Nakamura future Courthouse useby ord Wallace. The award, regarded asthehighesthonorthatcanbe , at the 2006 Ninth Circuit JudicialConference,, atthe2006Ninth heldlastJulyin eld boggeddown over scal issue, . Allin 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 4 9 : 4 9

A M Ninth Circuit Overview Ninth NINTH CIRCUIT OVERVIEW

The United States Courts for the Ninth Circuit consists of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit along with district and bankruptcy courts in the 15 federal judicial districts that comprise the circuit, plus associated administrative units that provide various services to the court.

Within the Ninth Circuit are the Districts of Alaska, Arizona, Central California, Eastern California, Northern California, Southern California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Eastern Washington, Western Washington, the U.S. Territory of Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. The establishment of the Ninth Circuit in 1866 began the development of the federal judicial system for the western United States. Today, it is the largest and busiest of federal circuits.

Judges serving on the circuit and district courts are known as Article III judges, a reference to the article in the U.S. Constitution establishing the federal judiciary. Article III judges are nominated by the President, confi rmed by the Senate and serve for life. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has been authorized 28 judgeships and ended 2006 with two vacant positions. For most of the year, the district courts were authorized 112 judgeships, nine of which were vacant at year’s end.

Federal courts also rely on senior circuit and senior district judges to assist with their workload. These are Article III judges who are eligible for retirement but have chosen to continue working with a reduced caseload. Senior circuit judges sit on appellate panels, serve on circuit and national judicial committees and handle a variety of administrative matters. In the district courts, 53 senior judges heard cases, presided over procedural matters, served on committees and conducted other business of their courts during 2006.

In addition to Article III judges, the Ninth Circuit has a number of Article I judges, who serve as magistrate judges in the district courts or as bankruptcy judges in the bankruptcy courts. Bankruptcy judges are appointed by the court of appeals to terms of 14 years, while magistrate judges are appointed by the individual district courts and hold their positions for eight years. In 2006, bankruptcy courts in the Ninth Circuit were authorized 68 permanent and fi ve temporary judgeships. The district courts were authorized 95 full-time and 11 part-time magistrate judges; several courts also relied on the services of recalled magistrate judges.

5

2006 Annual Report Final.indd Sec1:5 08/20/2007 8:49:51 AM 2 0 0 6

A n 6 n u Annual Report 2006 a l

R e p o to theJudicialCouncil ofthe NinthCircuit in2006. ClerkW. Court District Jr., clerks’ as thedistrict Hamrick, liaison ofCalifornia Samuel served District oftheSouthern currently District JudgeCharlesR.Breyer oftheNorthern judge chosenbyof avote the JudicialConference U.S. by itschiefjudgeandby adistrict CircuitThe isrepresented Ninth ontheExecutive Committee of council accomplishes mostofitswork through committees. include authorizingseniorjudgestaffi governing bodyfor thefederal courts. These responsibilities the JudicialConference oftheUnited States, thenational alsohasbeendelegated responsibilities by 332(d)(1)]. It administration ofjustice withinitscircuit,” [28U.S.C. and appropriate orders for theeff to authority hasstatutory It courts. “make allnecessary safeguarding offairnessintheadministration ofthe and expeditiousadministrationofjustice andthe The council’s theeff mission isto support statutory business by conference callormailballotwhennecessary. meetsthreecircuit. timesayear It to review issuesandresolve problems, additional conducting the chiefjudgeofcircuit, ofthe thecouncil guidance provides andleadershipto courts policy 11voting Circuit. membersare Its Ninth lookeduponasa “judicial board ofdirectors.” Chaired by The JudicialCouncil Circuit isthegoverning oftheNinth for bodyoftheUnited States the Courts J r t

F UDICIAL i n a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 6 C OUNCIL all district judgesinthecircuit, all district ective and expeditious andexpeditious ective

AND ng levels andpay. The A DMINISTRATION ective ective whose term willexpire inMarch 2007. JudgeB.District Lynn Winmill ofIdaho, of theDistrict 2005 through April2006.Hewassucceeded by Chief aschairoftheconferenceArizona served from December of JudgeStephen oftheDistrict M.McNamee District ayear. meetstwice judgeofeachdistrict, district Chief courts. The conference, which iscomprised ofthechief administration ofjustice ineachofthecircuit’s 15district the JudicialCouncil Circuit oftheNinth aboutthe The Conference Judgesadvises ofChiefDistrict Conference ofChiefDistrictJudges U.S. committees attherequest ofthechiefjustice. magistrate onvariousJudicialConference judgesalsoserve and of California. addition,circuit, bankruptcy In district, 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 4 9 : 5 5

A M M A

7 5 : 9 7 4 Ninth Circuit Overview : 8

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 support c islands c ering . Research Research . ord private counsel. They have have They counsel. private ord for responsible which are ces, provides Executive of the Circuit ce assist in identifying circuit-wide in the courts of the Pacifi building and automation also coordinates of 24 law a network public through and the staff provides Executive of the Circuit ce each of the Ninth in districtsces Circuit the with to the council and implements its administrative and implements its administrative the council to executive the circuit By statute, decisions and policies. the chief judge of the assistant to is the administrative circuit The and secretary the Judicial Council. circuit to and his staff executive developing proactively conducting studies, needs, public training, providing and implementing policies, support. Circuit and human resources information, staff executive and on procedural and advises the council projects, OffiThe ethical matters. expertisemanagement and technical courts to within the annual Ninth Judicial administers Circuit the circuit, for educational programs and facilitates Conference judges and court staff exception of the Northern on a which relies exception Mariana Islands, Act panel of attorneys. Criminal Justice Office of the Circuit Executive OffiThe Associated CourtAssociated Units importantNinth courts on several Circuit also rely court- of justice. the fair administration ensure agencies to related Probation districtThe courts of U.S. oversight maintain Services offi and Pretrial supervision and background of criminal defendants public federal circuit’s The and reports. investigations indigent represent and community defenders defender aff to unable defendants offi Ninth Circuit Library System attorneys, Ninth LibraryThe assists judges, Circuit System court staff libraries housed in courthouses western the throughout primaryThe mission of court provide librarians is to states. services judges and their staff to research by on case-related clerks librarians assist law research off and recommendations, guidance providing training opportunities, on performing and direct research to also conduct Librarians research topics. complex more and judges in the administration assist court executives of committees of local courts involving and on matters and the Judicial of the Ninth Circuit the Judicial Council available made also are Library resources U.S. Conference determined of access the bar and public with the level to local judges. by through a grant from the U.S. Department of the Interior. U.S. the from a grant through ling ce of the of ce and the Office resources. They also They resources. 7 : 1 c e S

d d n i . l a n i F

t r case motions, which includes research, Attorneys, o p e R

l a Clerks of Court Day-to-day management of the courts with the rests chief judge and clerk of court the court for of appeals and each of the district and bankruptcy courts. Clerks backboneof court the administrative of the federal are new cases processing for court responsible system, handling docketing functions, responding and appeals, and and bar, the public questions from procedural to judicial staff ensuring adequate electronic case fi to migration the courts’ oversee the clerk of court Catterson, and management. Cathy the Ninth Court Circuit for of Appeals also supervises the Mediation Offi of the Circuit work Staff the appellate Shaw, Peter se units. management and pro for Act vouchers Criminal Justice reviews commissioner, the court Clerks of the of appeals. before cases that come district and bankruptcy courts active members of also are committees. U.S. Ninth Conference and Judicial Circuit Magistrate Judges Executive Board Magistrate Judges Executive a channel provides Board Judges Executive Magistrate The of the the Judicial Council between of communication part-time than 100 full-time, Ninth and the more Circuit judges serving magistrate and recalled in the district courts. and meets with meets twice a year 14-member board The The conference. circuit judges at the annual all magistrate serves as an observer. chair of the board council on the Western Kelley Arnold of the Judge J. Chief Magistrate served from of the board as chair Washington District of September 2006. He was succeeded September 2004 to Battaglia of the Southern J. Judge Anthony Magistrate by in October Judge 2006. beginning District of California, until September 2008. Battaglia will chair the board The Conference of Chief Bankruptcy of Chief advises the Judges Conference The of the Ninth the administration on Circuit Judicial Council chair ofThe of the bankruptcy courts circuit. within the member of the council. is a non-voting the conference of chief bankruptcy consists which judges conference, The each district, Ninth judge of the from Circuit the presiding (retired) (BAP) and one recalled Bankruptcy Panel Appellate Chief Bankruptcy bankruptcy meets twice a year. judge, of the District the Zive of Nevada chaired W. Judge Gregg October to 2005 September 2006. He was from conference Chief Bankruptcy by succeeded Kirscher Judge Ralph of B. until the District of Montana, will chair the conference who September 2007. late Conference of Chief BankruptcyConference Judges

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 8 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o O r t

F i n a l RGANIZATION . i n d d

Committee Coordinating Representatives Lawyer Activities Resolutions Program Budget &Finance S Conference e c Committee Executive 1 Judicial : 8 Judicial CounciloftheNinthCircuit Executive Committee

OF

Judicial Officers THE Executive Board Magistrate Judges Judges Bankruptcy Conference ofChief Judges District Conference ofChief Associates of N Chief Judge Mary M.Schroeder Chief JudgeMary INTH C IRCUIT C Services Offi Services & ChiefPretrial Chief Probation Clerks Bankruptcy Clerks District Committees Office of Liaison Liaison Gregory B.Gregory Walters, Circuit Executive OMMITTEES cers Executive the Circuit Circuit Wellness III Space &Security Litigants (Pro Se) Represented Self Community Outreach Public Information & Pacifi Judges Education Circuit Ninth Improvement TrialJury Instructions Jury ofCourt Inns Technology Information Defenders Federal Public Appointments Judge Bankruptcy Committee on Court-Council Capital Case Resolution Alternative Dispute Board Advisory Committees Advisory & Standing Standing c Islands 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 4 9 : 5 7

A M Judicial Transitions

Sandra Segal Ikuta is sworn into offi ce as a new judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by Circuit Judge Alex Kozinksi.

2006 Annual Report Final.indd Sec1:9 08/20/2007 8:49:57 AM 2 0 0 6

A n 10 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o District Judges District Circuit Judges N Pasadena. Chicago Law in1969.Hemaintainschambers School Young University in1966andhisJ.D. from theUniversity of 1969 to 1972.JudgeSmithreceived hisB.A. from Brigham 1989 to 1990.ShemaintainschambersinPasadena. O’Connor (now retired) oftheU.S. from Supreme Court from 1988to 1989andfor Associate Justice SandraDay oftheU.S.Kozinski ofAppealsfor Circuit theNinth Court in 1988.Following law school, sheclerkedfor JudgeAlex the University ofCalifornia atLos ofLaw AngelesSchool her M.S.from Columbia University in1978andherJ.D. from A.B. from theUniversity ofCalifornia atBerkeleyin1976, 2004 atO’Melveny &Myers LLP. received JudgeIkuta her Anchorage. University Law in1987.Hemaintainschambers School and hisJ.D.University ofAlaska from theNortheastern received hisB.A. in1978andhisM.B.A. in1982from the Gilmore &Feldman from 1987to 1989.JudgeBurgess r t

F i n a EW l . i n d d

S J e c 1 : 1 UDGES 0 Judge Timothy Burgess wasappointed a DaleSmith,Jr.,Judge Milan was wasappointed Ikuta Judge Sandra Segal 1989 andfrom 1989to from 1987 to for ofAlaska theDistrict United States attorney thenU.S. attorney asanassistant Judge Burgess served 23,2006.Prior to his January on judgefor ofAlaska district theDistrict associate atO’Melveny &Myers from California, from 1972to 2006.Hewasan Crane Robinson&Parker LLPin Torrance, atSmith Smith wasamanaging partner 2006. Prior to hisappointment,Judge ofAppealsonMay 18, Circuit Court appointed acircuit judgeto theNinth from 1997to to 1997andthenpartner to 2006.Shewasanassociate from 1990 California Resources from Agency 2004 andgeneralcounsel atthe secretary wasadeputy appointment, JudgeIkuta of AppealsonJune23,2006.Prior to her a circuit Circuit judgeto Court theNinth He wasanassociate atthelaw fi

IN 2006 2006 r appointment, appointment, espectively. rm of to 1984.ShemaintainschambersinHagatna. forof theCircuit JacksonCounty, Court from 1983 Missouri, Following law school, sheclerkedfor JudgeForest W. Hanna ofLaw School in1983. City University ofMissouri-Kansas Marquette University in1980andherJ.D. from the 1994. Judge Tydingco-Gatewood received herB.A. from for theGuamOffi of Guamfrom 2002to 2006.Shewasthechiefprosecutor School of LawSchool in1989. Hemaintainschambersin Riverside. and hisJ.D. from California theUniversity ofSouthern Larson received hisB.S. from Georgetown University in1986 associate atO’Melveny &Myers from 1989to 1991.Judge Organized Crimecoordinator from 1994to 1998.Hewasan Strike Force from 1999to 2000,andasRussian Section, 1991 to aschiefoftheOrganized 2000,working Crime Attorney’s Offi attorney in theLos AngelesCriminalDivisionoftheU.S. from 1997to 2001.JudgeLarsonwasan assistantU.S. assistantprofessoran adjunct for Glendale College ofLaw California Law from Southern School 2001to 2005andwas LaVerne College ofLaw at since 2002.Hewasaninstructor Law in1975.HemaintainschambersSantaAna. from theUniversity ofCalifornia atLos of AngelesSchool University ofCalifornia atLos Angelesin1972andhisJ.D. ce for ofCalifornia theCentral District from ce oftheAttorney Generalfrom 1990to Judge Frances Marie Tydingco- Judge Stephen G.Larsonwasappointed Judge Andrew J. Guilford wasappointed associate justice for theSupreme Court Guam from 1994to 2002andwasan judgefor of theSuperiorCourt court Tydingco-Gatewood wasasuperior 2006. Prior to herappointment,Judge 27, for ofGuamonOctober theDistrict Gatewood was adjunct professoradjunct attheUniversity of from 2000to 2006.JudgeLarsonisan for ofCaliforniaCourt theCentral District magistrate judgefor theU.S. District asa appointment, JudgeLarsonserved California onMarch 21,2006.Prior to his judgefor a district theCentral of District Guilford received hisA.B. from the &HamptonMullin, Richter LLP. Judge from 1983to 2006atSheppard,partner associate from 1975to 1983andthen appointment, JudgeGuilford wasan California onJuly7,2006.Prior to his judgefor a district theCentral of District appointed a district judge judge appointed adistrict 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 4 9 : 5 9

A M M A

0 0 : 0 5 Judicial Transitions : 8 11

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 c in 1977 and his J.D. rm of Stutman, Tresiter & Tresiter rm of Stutman, a bankruptcy the District of for judge to Nevada on September Prior 1, 2006. Nakagawahis appointment, Judge was from a principal at Nakagawa & Rico P.A. He was a partner 2006. 1994 to at 1994Namba & Nakagawa to 1993 from and a partner Namba & Cespedes, at a bankruptcy the Central judge for 18, on February District of California he was his appointment, to 2006. Prior the Los at then shareholder an associate fi Angeles law 2006. He served 1962 to onGlatt from the for mediators the panel of trained Judge Mike K. Nakagawa was appointed appointed was Judge Richard M. Neiter ty Bar Association. He maintains chambers in Nakagawa from 1992 to 1993. Judge Nakagawa received Judge Nakagawa 1993. Nakagawa 1992 to received from of the Pacifi the University from his B.A. in 1980. He at Davis of California the University from Vegas. in Las maintains chambers Bankruptcy DistrictCentral of California Court. Judge Neiter at Los of California the University from his B.S. received of Southern the University from Angeles in 1959 and his J.D. was a member of he School in 1962, where Law California Review. Law the Southern California for of Editors the Board chairman of the Debtor/Creditor as served Judge Neiter Bar of the State Relations and Bankruptcy for Committee Committee was a member of the Executive and California and Bankruptcy Law Section the Commercial for of the Los Coun Angeles Angeles. Los rm rm of rm his B.S. his B.S. tner with the law fi tner with the law ounsel in the law fi ounsel in the law emsky received ambers in Los Angeles. ambers in Los bankruptcy the judge for 1988, Judge Kaufman was an Russian revolution. From 1998 to From Russian revolution. intains ch intains appointed aappointed 2, on May District Central California of Judge her appointment, to 2006. Prior wasKaufman of c of Efremsky & Nagel representing of Efremsky & Nagel representing California clients throughout corporate and served as advisory the to counsel a bankruptcy the Northern for judge 1, 2006. on August District California of Judge his appointment, to Prior wasEfremsky a par Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP in Walker Janofsky & Hastings, Paul, Judge Kaufman Angeles. received Los Bryn from in 1986 College her B.A. Mawr Judge Victoria S. KaufmanVictoria was Judge Judge Roger L. EfremskyJudge Roger was appointed 1 1 ding the : 1 c national ed on behalf of representative e S

d d n i . l a n i F

t r o p e R

l a from Menlo College in 1978 and his J.D. from Santa Clara Santa from in 1978 and his J.D. Menlo College from of a recipient in 1983. He was the SchoolUniversity of Law the study of for Rotary Fellowship International of Cape and politics at the University law international He maintains chambers in Republic of South Africa. Town, San Jose. Chapter 13 Standing Trustees for the Oakland, the San for Trustees 13 Standing Chapter of the United San Jose and Santa Rosa divisions Francisco, BankruptcyStates Court the Northern for District of the National chairman of He is a former California. (NACTT)Trustees Thirteen Creditor of Chapter Association Auxiliary and has served on a number of professional Judge Efremsky and local levels. at the state committees has also testifi on Senate Subcommittee the U.S. before creditors the role Oversight and the Courts regarding Administrative Efr Judge system. Trustee of the U.S. Bankruptcy Judges instructor in the Foreign Student Orientation Program at Student Orientation Program instructor in the Foreign 1989, she was a 1988 to Harvard and from School, Law at Harvard course an undergraduate assistant for teaching regar University and her J.D. from Harvard she School from in 1989, where Law and her J.D. of the Harvard editor Developments was the Recent Journal. Law International In of the Judge Marilyn Shea-Stonum 1999, she clerked for BankruptcyU.S. Court of the Northern District of Ohio, Akron Division. She ma

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 12 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o Magistrate Judges N from 1981to 1995.Hemaintains chambersinMissoula. ofMontana for theDistrict Court the United States District Judge Lynch asalaw clerkto Judge served P ofLaw School in 1981.FollowingMontana law school, maintains chambersinLos Angeles. California,Southern ofLaw GouldSchool in1986.She at Los Angelesin1982andherJ.D. from theUniversity of Chooljian received herB.A. from theUniversity ofCalifornia ofC Central District a judicialclerkto ChiefJudgeAlicemarie H.Stotler ofthe Crutcher inLos as Angelesfrom 1987and1989.Sheserved was alitigationassociate atthelaw fi Sacramento. representative from Administration 1984; andfor asaclaims Security theSocial worked intheOffi ofCaliforniaDistrict from 1984to 1988.JudgeBrennan Edward J. Garcia oftheU.S. for Court theEastern District school, asalaw JudgeBrennan clerkto served Judge Southwestern ofLaw University School in1979.After law College, Crete, in1973andhisJ.D. Nebraska, from in theCivilDivision. He received his B.A. from Doane r t

F i n a EW l . i n d d

S J e c 1 : 1 UDGES 2 ce ofHearings andAppealsfrom 1980to Judge Jeremiah C.Lynch wasappointed Judge Jacqueline Chooljianwas Judge EdmundF. Brennan was 1973 andhisJ.D. from the University of from Carroll College, in Helena,Mont., from 1996to 2006.Hereceived hisB.A. inGreatlitigation practice Falls, Mont., appointment, JudgeLynch hadaprivate onJune10,2006.PriorMontana to his a magistrate of judgefor the District and specialcounsel. JudgeChooljian 1989, thelastfour years ascriminalchief ofCaliforniathe Central District since intheU.S.served Attorney’s Offi 9, 2006.Prior to herappointment,she ofCaliforniaCentral District onJanuary appointed amagistrate judgefor the positions, including, mostre 2006, holdingvarioussupervisory ofCaliforniaEastern District from 1988to the U.S. Attorney’sin Offi served 21, 2006.Prior to hisappointment,hehad Eastern Distric mag appointed a alifornia in alifornia in 1977 to 1980. He maintains chambers in 1977 to 1980.Hemaintainschambersin

CONTINUED 1986 and 1987. Judge 1986 and1987.Judge t of California onAugust istrate judge for the istrate judgefor the rm of Gibson, Dunn & rm ofGibson,Dunn& aul G. Hatfield of of aul G.Hatfield cently ce for the ce for the ce for , chief , chief chambers inLos Angeles. the College of in1979.Hemaintains William andMary B.S. from theUniversity of Virginia in1976andhisJ.D. from Angeles priorto goingto CBS.JudgeMummreceived his at and wasapartner Walter Finestone inLos &Richter general counsel ofCBSBroadcasting from Inc. 1993to 1999 litigation.JudgeMummwasassociate entertainment Offi 1991 to 2006.Prior to joiningtheFederal Public Defender’s in 1990.Hemaintainschambers inRiverside. University ofCalifornia atBerkeley, ofLaw, BoaltHallSchool Diego State University in1987,andhisJ.D. from the University atSanLuis Obispo, in1982,hisM.B.A. from San receivedRayburn hisB.S. from California Polytechnic the Riverside Branch oftheU.S. Attorney’s Offi chief oftheSantaAnaBranch andthree years asthechiefof for approximately served Rayburn fi Law in1990.HemaintainschambersRiverside. School State University atFullerton in1987andhisJ.D. from Loyola 1989 to 1990.JudgeParada received hisB.A. from California inLosInc., from Angelesin1991andwasalegalextern ce, hewasastaff Judge OswaldParada wasappointed a Judge Frederick F. Mummwas Judge John C. Rayburn, Jr.,Judge JohnC.Rayburn, was intellectual property, intellectual mediaand 2006, where hespecialized in Tremaine inLos Angelesfrom 2000to atDavis Mumm wasapartner Wright the Central District ofCaliforniathe Central District from at theFederal Public Defender’s Offi federaland wasadeputy publicdefender attorneythe directing from 1995to 2006 to hisappointment,JudgeParada was 20,2006.Prior of California onJanuary magistrate judgefor theCentral District 2006. Pr ofCaliforniaDistrict onApril3, Central appointed amagistrate judgefor the appointed as a mag a appointed as of California. Duringthattime, Judge Attorney’s Offi federal prosecutor intheUnited States spent 15yearsJudge Rayburn asa 13, 2006.Prior to his appointment, ofCaliforniaCentral District onOctober attorney atElRescate Legal Services, ior to his appointment, Judge ior to hisappointment,Judge ce for theCentral District ve years asthedeputy istrate judgefor the ce. Judge 0 ce ce for 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 0 : 0 1

A M M A

2 0 : 0 5 Judicial Transitions : 8 13

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 istrict Court for the Central DistrictCourt the Central of for a district was appointed judge California, 7, 1987 and assumed senioron May to 19, 2006. Prior status on September bench, federal the his appointment to Superior was a California Judge Lew from Angeles County, Court Los judge, Judge Ronald S.W. Lew, of the U.S. D of the U.S. Lew, S.W. Judge Ronald his received 1974. Judge Lew 1972 to from ce 1976 to from commissioner pension and police re 1984 to 1987 and was a California Municipal Court Municipal judge, 1987 and was a California 1984 to 1984. He was the Los 1982 to from Angeles County, Los Angeles fi Angeles practice engaged in private in Los 1982. Judge Lew 1981. He was the deputy 1974 to city of thefrom attorney Angeles CityCriminal and Civil Liability Divisions in the Los Offi Attorney’s from in 1964 and his J.D. University Loyola from B.A. He in 1971. School University of Law Southwestern Angeles. maintains chambers in Los District Court for the Western District of Western District the Courtfor a district was appointed Washington, 28, 1981. Hejudge on September 2004served 1997 to from as chief judge status on July 27,and assumed senior his appointment, Judge to 2006. Prior engaged in private Coughenour Judge John C. Coughenour, of the U.S. of the U.S. C. Coughenour, Judge John 3 1 : 1 c e S

d d n i . l a n i F

t r o p e R

l practice in Seattle, Washington, from 1966 to 1981 and was 1981 to 1966 from Washington, practice in Seattle, of at the University of law an assistant professor received Judge Cougheour 1973. 1970 to from Washington in 1963 and of Pittsburgh Kansas from College State his B.S. in 1966. of Law College of Iowa the University from his J.D. He maintains chambers in Seattle. New Senior Judges a

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 14 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o I grandchildren. by hisdaughters,He issurvived DeenaandRosie, andhis Law in1939.Judge Goldwater passed away onMay 3,2006. 1936 andhisJ.D. from theUniversity ofColorado of School his undergraduate degree from theUniversity ofNevadain a year-to-year basissince then.JudgeGoldwater received on accepted benchandhasserved recall to thebankruptcy with thelaw fi 1982, whenhereturned to inLas private practice Vegas Victoria. his nephews, andMatthew, Mark andnieces, Julieand by 12,2006.Heissurvived Byrne passedaway onJanuary ofCalifornia. for District Court theSouthern Judge District school, heclerkedfor theHon. Pierson M.HalloftheU.S. Californiaof Southern Law in1956.Following School law CaliforniaSouthern in1953andhisLL.B. from theUniversity 1958. JudgeByrnereceived hisB.S. from theUniversity of intheUnited States AirForce1960. Heserved from 1956to attorney ofCalifornia for District theSouthern from 1958to Angeles from 1960to 1967.HewastheassistantU.S. inLos1970. JudgeByrneengagedinprivate practice attorney for ofCalifornia theCentral District from 1967to on Campus asUnited Unrest States in1970.Heserved was theexecutive director for President Nixon’s Commission r t N

F i n a M l . i n d d

S e EMORIAM c 1 : 1 4 rm ofLionel, Sawyer &Collins. 1994,he In Bankruptcy Judge Bert M.Goldwater, Judge Bert Bankruptcy of Judge District Senior Wm. Matthew bench. He served on the court until until onthecourt bench. Heserved 1964 untilhisappointmentto the trustee inNevadafrom as bankruptcy appointment, JudgeGoldwater served judgein1979.Prior to his bankruptcy ofNevada,wasappointed a the District for Court the United States Bankruptcy appointment to thebench,JudgeByrne on February 28,1998.Prior to his 1994 to 1998and assumedseniorstatus aschiefjudgefrom 1971. Heserved judgeonMay 20, appointed adistrict ofCalifornia,Central District was Byrne, Jr., oftheU.S. for Court the District several grandchildren andgreat-grandchildren. by and hisdaughters,survived DonnettaandMaryetta, Judge Tanner 10,2006.Heis passedaway onJanuary from theUniversity of Washington ofLaw School in1955. his B.A. from College ofPuget in1953andhisLL.B. Sound in theU.S. Army from 1943to 1945.Judge Tanner received Marshall’s tenure astheNAACP’s generalcounsel. Heserved member ofthenationalboard ofdirectors during Thurgood chapter president, aregional vice president and asa through the1960s. Judge Tanner served as a Tacoma Advancement ofColored People (NAACP) from 1956 withtheNationalAssociation1978. Hewasactive for the grandchildren. by hiswife hischildren survived Gala, andhis Judge Howard 29,2006.Heis passedaway onJanuary from theUniversity of Washington ofLaw School in1956. B.A. from theUniversity of Washington in1953andhisLL.B. Coast Guard from 1956to 1957.JudgeHoward received his intheUnited States specialized incivillitigation.Heserved Scholfi lawHe practiced withthelaw fi eld, Willits andAger for 11years, where he Senior District JudgeJackE. District Senior Tanner, of JudgeFrankBankruptcy D. Howard, of private practice in private practice Tacoma from 1955to to thebench,Judge Tanner wasin 28,1991.PrJanuary 1978 andassumedseniorstatuson judgeonMay 19, appointed adistrict Western of District Washington, was for the Court the United States District judge, County, King from 1968to 1988. asa served Washington SuperiorCourt to thefederal bench,JudgeHoward retired in1996.Prior to hisappointment appointed onFebruary 1,1988and the Western of District Washington, was for Court the United States Bankruptcy rm of Guttormsen, rm ofGuttormsen, ior to hisa ppointment ppointment 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 0 : 0 3

A M Ninth Circuit Highlights

Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., addresses the 2006 Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference.

2006 Annual Report Final.indd Sec1:15 08/20/2007 8:50:04 AM 2 0 0 6

A n 16 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o Executive Board. ofthesegroups Members are often JudgesandtheMagistrate Judges and ChiefBankruptcy committees: theconferences Judges ofChiefDistrict wellness Circuit’s atmeetingsoftheNinth keygovernance 2006,JudgeProIn renewed thedialogueonjudicial to chairthenewcommittee. Judge PhilipM.Pro ofNevadawaschosen oftheDistrict current programs anddevelop newones. ChiefDistrict Wellness IIICommittee, namedinlate 2005to continue recommendations ofthetaskforce; andthecurrent Committee, outkey appointed inlate 2000to carry addressing judicialdisabilities;theJudicial Wellness 1999 to consider formal andinformal methodsof the Task Force onJudicialDisability, establishedin The wellness initiative spansthree committees: the prestigious AmericanJudicature Society. newsletter and “Judicature” magazine, publishedby appearingintheFederalarticles JudgesAssociation Circuit eff 2006,theNinth In web site. educational seminarsand, soon,awellness-focused newsletters,judges, alongwithquarterly periodic confi judges. The circuit off promoting healthandwellness amongfederal CircuitThe hasbeenanationalleaderin Ninth Judicial HealthandWellness are involved work, inimportant noteworthy for several 2006wasparticularly committees. recommendationsto studyandmake onmatters involving theadministration ofjustice. While all The JudicialCouncil andstandingcommittees oftheNinthCircuit relies onnumerous advisory N r the NinthCircuit. judgein distributed toevery PALS concept have been staff their families and chambers PALS isavailable tojudges, t

F i n a . Flyers explainingthe INTH l . dential telephone counseling service fordential telephone counseling federal service i n d d

S e c 1 C : 1 6 IRCUIT ers thenation’s only

C • Stress • Stress •

ort was highlighted in washighlighted in ort

S

L

A

P PALS ervice

ine

•

ssistance

Mental or or Mental r

OMMITTEES

iva

• Li •

Be

fe Transitions • Aging • Aging • Transitions fe

re

t

e

a

vement • • vement

Phy

sical challenge sical

Emotional dist Emotional

s • s

r ess • ess comprehension were onesallowing jurors to takenotes to jurorNotable amongtherecommendations pertaining jurors may service. have duringjury juror comprehension; andaddressing personal concerns dire, theprocess jurors usedto for select trial;improving pools; more eff recommendations includedbetter management ofjury experience ofcitizens calledfor service. federal jury The accepted therecommendations oftheJury Trial October,In theJudicialCouncil Circuit oftheNinth TrialJury Improvement provide valuable counsel. whohadhave priorexperienceother experts andcould judgesandrecruitment ofacadredistrict ofjudgesand for allconcerned. Ideasincludeahandbookto assistchief they canhandlethesesituationsinthebestway possible committee isexploringways to provide resources sothat called uponto dealwithwellness issues. anddisability The on avariety oftopicsrelated tohealthandwellness forjudges. GoodHealth,”“Courting aNinthCircuit publication, off Improvement Committee onhow to improve the ective useofjurors’ective time;improved voir ers helpful advice ers helpfuladvice 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 0 : 0 6

A M M A

7 0 : 0 5 :

Ninth Circuit Highlights 8 17

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 and NBC of the ABC, CBS liates It and other guests. was the largest local affi sponsored by the U.S. District the Southern Court for the U.S. by sponsored Public Ninth and the District Circuit of California Committee. (PICO) Outreach and Community Information held Workshop, Courts Media San Diego Federal The Courthouse, Schwartz J. U.S. 30 at the Edward March judges, federal nearly 100 media representatives, drew court staff attorneys, the the Ninth be held in since to Circuit media workshop in 2002. the events began organizing Committee PICO Ninth included Chief Judge MaryParticipants Circuit M. Chief District Judge Irma of the E. Gonzalez Schroeder, Southern District, District and Chief Judge Robert S. Lasnik of the Committee. of the PICO chair Washington, District of Western at about 40 journalists media turnout was estimated The both print and electronic media outlets, representing North County including the San Diego Union-Tribune, Angeles Daily Los Riverside Press-Enterprise, Times, City Service, News Press, Associated The Journal, Univision, and networks. television A media workshop held in San than 100 people, A media workshop more Diego drew including 20 federal judges and dozens of Southern California journalists. nal jury instructions in 7 1 : 1 c e S

d ectively use jurors’ time, the committee the committee time, ectively use jurors’ d n i . l a n i F

t r o p e R

l a Public Information and Community Outreach court journalists in is a bit less daunting for federal The media workshop a highly successful San Diego thanks to The Jury Trial Improvement Committee was established Committee Improvement Trial JuryThe District by Judge Susan R. Bolton in 2002 and is chaired endorsement of its of the District Council of Arizona. district is expected encourage to recommendations courts undertake to the circuit within the changes. explain the to will conduct workshops committee The district to courtsrecommendations in 2007. beginning To more eff more To limits in civil cases, setting time recommended of a length about the estimated jurors to communicating needs in setting jury schedules. jurors’ and considering trial, to conferences use of pretrial was greater Also suggested the trial. and streamline time use jurors’ better written form. In civil trials, jurors also could submit written submit written also could jurors In civil trials, form. written as the trial discuss evidence the bench and to questions providing recommended committee The progresses. about the trial and judicial information and better more allow and to dire, of voir at the beginning jurors to process after the dire conduct to voir supplemental attorneys is completed. questioning court’s and receive preliminary and fi and receive

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 18 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o Instructions. Instructions. This eff Civil Jury a majorrevision ofModel oftheManual Committee completed Instructions CircuitThe Jury Ninth Instructions Jury Foundation. and thegoverning board ofthe Western Justice Center Judge Dorothy W. Nelson,whochairsthecommittee Foundation. The collaboration wasledby Circuit Senior (JAMS) Services the JudicialArbitrationandMediation profi The guidewasdeveloped by thecommittee andtwo non- withinthecircuit. courts of thefederal district bar events, suchastheannualconferences heldby many programs. isintended for It useby those planningbench- on how to organize andimplementADReducational Programs andGuideto Resources,” off The “Education Programs ADR:Model onCourt-Sponsored and othermeansofresolving legalconfl educational programs f to assistfederal judgesandattorneys indeveloping Resolution released inMay apublication designed CircuitThe Committee Ninth onAlternative Dispute DisputeResolution Alternative California, willoversee Circuit program. theNinth JudgeDavid O.District of oftheCentral Carter District Circuit’sThe Ninth Capital Case Committee, chaired by judges presiding over orreviewing thesediffi special casebudgetingattorneys ineachcircuit to assist circuits.Second andSixth The moneywillbeusedto hire funding for pilotprogram athree-year involving theNinth, U.S. isoverseeing theeff CommitteeDefender oftheJudicialConference Services multiple defendants and/orotherchallenges. The death casesandto “mega” criminalcasesinvolving management ofthegrowing numberoffederal direct Circuitinitiative methodsto thatwillapplyNinth This success hasprompted plansfor anewnational taxpayers ofsome$3millionannually. and monitor casestatus. The result hasbeenasavings to provides tools electronic to planfor andtrack expenses management trainingfor judgesandattorneys and management andbudgeting. The circuit off costs for complex capitalhabeascasesthrough better CircuitThe hasbecome Ninth theleaderincontrolling Capital HabeasManagement N r t

F i n a INTH l t groups, the Western Justice Center Foundation, and . i n d d

S e c 1 C : 1 8 IRCUIT ort was ledby thecommittee’sort ocusing onarbitration,mediation ort and is expected to provide andisexpected ort C OMMITTEES ers numerous ideas icts. icts. ers case cult cases.

CONTINUED agencies. collaboration withcorrectional systems andprosecutorial appropriate andcase managementsystems, software and counsel inmeritorious pro secivilcases, development of and materials, strategies for appointmentof pro bono will assistwithtrainingand educationalprograms designated judgesandpro selaw clerks, thecommittee addition to presenting anannualPro Conference Se for torespect case managementandaccess In to the courts. se cases, andto suggestanddevelop innovations with for assistance courts withmanagement ofpro bankruptcy committee are to respond to requests and from district the taskforce recommendations. The goalsofthe California, inthecircuit inimplementing willassistcourts of District Magistrate JudgeEdward ChenoftheNorthern Represented Litigants. The newcommittee, chaired by the work Circuit’s begunby theNinth Task Force onSelf- The Pro on Committee Se wasestablishedin2006to carry Pro SeLitigants Executive athttp://www.ce9.uscourts.gov. be accessed onthe web site oftheOffi can instructions Circuit modelcivilandcriminaljury Ninth suggestions from judges, staff ifneeded. the instructions The committee considers that may aff Circuit andUnitedof theNinth States Supreme Court ongoing basisthecommittee alsoreviews newdecisions Onan Instructions. CriminalJury ofModel the Manual committee arevision for of 2007willbeto undertake committee inSeptember 2006. The mainfocus ofthe of California whocompleted fi oftheCentral JudgeGeorge King District chair District Mediation Services Foundation,Mediation Services was released inMay. Western Justice Center Foundation andtheJudicialArbitration and and GuidetoResources, ”developed by theADRCommittee, the The “Education Programs ADR:ModelPrograms onCourt-Sponsored ect the model jury instructions, andrevises instructions, themodeljury ect , and practitioners. , andpractitioners. The ve onthe years ofservice ce oftheCircuit 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 0 : 0 9

A M Ninth Circuit Highlights Ninth 2006 NINTH CIRCUIT JUDICIAL CONFERENCE

The 2006 Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference, held July 10-13 at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Huntington Beach, Calif., focused on “Seismic Shifts in the Law and in Our Lives.” The educational program included panel presentations on sentencing, juries, natural disasters, court security, disaster planning, and judicial wellness.

The annual event is held pursuant to Section 333 of Title 28 of the United States Code for “the purpose of considering the business of the courts and advising means of improving the administration of justice within such circuit.” Most of the judges who preside and lawyers who practice in the federal courts of the western United States participate.

Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder offi cially opened the conference with a state of the circuit speech, touching on a variety of topics, including sporadic attempts by some in Congress to split the circuit.

“The view of the overwhelming majority of our circuit judges, district and bankruptcy judges is that the circuit should not be divided,” Judge Schroeder said, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., making his fi rst visit to a Ninth Circuit citing as example, a published letter signed by 33 of 47 conference, shared anecdotes and impressions from his fi rst year on the active and senior circuit judges opposed to the split. nation’s highest court. Associate Justice Stephen G. Breyer, shown below, Three Justices Participate participated in a discussion of sentencing alternatives. The 2006 conference was particularly noteworthy for the participation of three justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Making his fi rst appearance at a Ninth Circuit conference was Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., who off ered remarks on his fi rst year on the bench of the nation’s highest court. He also participated in the “Conversation with the Chief Justice” segment fi elding questions from Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder of Fresno and Chief District Judge Robert S. Lasnik of Seattle, conference chair and program chair, respectively, of the Conference Executive Committee, and attorney Peg Toledo of Sacramento, chair of the circuit’s Lawyer Representatives Coordinating Committee.

Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy was present as the new designated justice for the Ninth Circuit, replacing retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. Justice 19

2006 Annual Report Final.indd Sec1:19 08/20/2007 8:50:10 AM 2006 NINTH CIRCUIT JUDICIAL CONFERENCE CONTINUED

Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy addressed the conference and participated in his own “Conversation with the Justice” segment. Now the Annual Report 2006 designated justice for the Ninth Circuit, Justice Kennedy is shown here with, from left, Circuit Judge Consuelo M. Callahan, Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder, and Seattle attorney Merrilee MacLean.

Kennedy was welcomed at a special reception and later Survey and Southern California Earthquake Center participated in a “Conversation with the Justice” segment discussing advances in our understanding of seismic featuring Circuit Judge Consuelo Callahan of Sacramento, events and risk analysis with respect to earthquakes, and attorney Merrilee MacLean of Seattle, a member of volcanic activity, and tsunamis. “Disaster Planning: Dealing the circuit’s Advisory Board. with the Daze After” featured remarks from Circuit Judge Carolyn Dineen King of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Associate Justice Stephen Breyer also attended the event the Fifth Circuit and several attorneys involved in the and received an impromptu invitation to join a panel struggle to rebuild the legal systems in New Orleans after discussing the diffi culties in deciding sentences. Also Hurricane Katrina in 2005. participating were U.S. Sentencing Commission Chairman District Judge Ricardo Hinojosa of the Southern District of Texas, attorney Cristina C. Arguedas, and U.S. Attorney Carol Lam of San Diego.

Varied Educational Program Two conference segments sessions focused on enhancing the performance of juries. “Jury Reform: Making a Great System Better, or Fixing What Isn’t Broken?” examined state and federal eff orts to improve jury utilization. Panelists for the session included Chief District Judge Vaughn R. Walker of the Northern District of California and District Judge Susan R. Bolton of the District of Arizona, chair of the circuit’s Jury Trial Improvement Committee. A second session on “Jury Reform: Are Seismic Changes Warranted?” continued the discussion, with attorney Patricia Lee Refo as keynote speaker.

Other panels centered on preparation for and recovery after catastrophes. The session “Giants in the Earth: Current Thinking on Earthquakes, Tsunamis and Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder of Fresno was the fi rst Volcanoes,” featured scientists from the U.S. Geological magistrate judge to chair a Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference.

20

2006 Annual Report Final.indd Sec1:20 08/20/2007 8:50:13 AM M A

5 1 : 0 5 :

Ninth Circuit Highlights 8 21

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 John P. Frank Award Frank John P. received Shirley Mount Hufstedler attorney Esteemed an outstanding recognizing Award, Frank the John P. courts practicinglawyer of the western in the federal John P. the late is named for award The States. United law author, a distinguished attorney, of Arizona, Frank civil liberties Itlegal historian. and was advocate professor, chair of the Ninth Esq., Circuit Bird, W. Terry by presented behalf Hufstedler’s on Ms. and accepted Advisory Board, of Division justice presiding the Hon. Dennis M. Perluss, by Court State of Appeal. of the California Seven in 1950 as a private began her legal career Hufstedler Ms. a judge She was appointed Angeles. practitioner in Los Superior Court Angeles County in 1961, and of the Los Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder joined Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Ruth V. Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder joined Arizona Court Supreme Ruth V. Chief Justice Court Supreme Inns of Court, of the American a trustee and Washington McGregor, Inns of Court the American of recipient Ninth Circuit GerryChief Justice L. Alexander, Award. Professionalism RESENTATIONS P Inns American Courts States United of the and the prestigious ce WARD A 1 2 : 1 c e S

d d n i . l a n i F

t r o ONFERENCE p e R

l a The American InnsThe of Court, a national organization with 340 inns and 75,000 active and alumni members, and professionalism, civility, excellence, to is dedicated An American Inn of Court is ethics in the practice of law. law and in some cases, lawyers, an amalgam of judges, improve to Inns intended are students. and law professors and ethics of the bench and bar. the skills, professionalism Justice Alexander currently chairs the Advisory Alexander currently Justice Reports, Law the Bench- Washington on Commission and Washington, of of the State Committee Bar-Press He is a cofounder Judicial Administration. for the Board Courts Historical Washington member of the and board Visitors Society of and an emeritus member of the Board of the Seattle School University of Law. has served as chief justice, elected by his electedhas served by as chief justice, 2001, making since him the colleagues, serving longest chief justice. state’s Justice Alexander has more than 30 years of than 30 years Alexander has more Justice Washington. service courtsstate the to of He was county court superior judge judge of the 1984 and a 1973 to from Court 1985 to of Appeals from Washington Supreme Washington 1994. Elected the to Court in 1994 and re-elected in 2000, he Ninth Circuit Professionalism Award Ninth Circuit Professionalism GerryChief Justice L. Alexander of the the Court Supreme received Washington 2006 American Inns of Court Ninth Circuit which recognizes Award, Professionalism senior practicing or judge whose lawyer “a character sterling practice and display life with coupled and unquestioned integrity, the highest standardsongoing dedication to and the rule of law.” of the legal profession Chief Justice by was presented award The Supreme the Arizona of McGregor V. Ruth Court, American Inns of the a trustee of Court. The Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference provides an opportunity to recognize outstanding service outstanding an opportunity provides recognize to Ninth Judicial Conference The Circuit Ninth of the Council the Judicial by given Awards system. and judicial profession the legal to Offi the Administrative Circuit, C were winners following The session. opening conference’s during the of Court presented are 2006: for announced

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 22 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o Offi presented by JamesC.Duff program directed atlocaluniversities. The award was ofarecruitment locations, andinthestart-up courthouse of aredundant datastorage area network for two his court’s ofoperationsplan, theintroduction continuity was alsoinstrumentalinthedevelopment andplanning saving money, facilities. especiallyinthearea He ofcourt and whileconsolidating functions to thecourts support Mr. Hamrickwasrecognized for and improving services the Administrative Offi 2005 Director’s Award for OutstandingLeadership from ofCalifornia District Southern since 2002,received the W. Jr., SamuelHamrick, clerkfor the court district Award Director’s Thomas Stipanowich oftheStraus Institute. presented theawards to Mr. Lombardi andProfessor Circuit’sNinth Alternative Dispute ResolutionCommittee, CircuitSenior JudgeDorothy W. Nelson, chairofthe professionalsand othermid-career . in negotiation,mediationandarbitration for lawyers, judges for studentseachyear andprofessional educationprograms The provides StrausInstitute basicandadvanced curricula have signifi Circuit ADREducationAward recognizing law schoolsthat Pepperdine ofLaw University School received theNinth The for StrausInstitute Dispute Resolutionatthe reducing courts, theappellate court’sdistrict workload. attorneys whohelpresolve casesemerging from the program since 1992.Heleadsastaff Mr. Lombardi Circuit mediation hasheadedtheNinth of eff employees whohave signifi in Alternative Dispute Resolution,recognizing judicial F.recipient oftheRobert Peckham Award for Excellence ofAppeals, the2006 Circuit wasselected Court Ninth David E.Lombardi, Jr., chiefcircuit mediator ofthe DisputeResolution Alternative where sheiscurrently seniorofcounsel. Hufstedler now &Kaus, merged into &Foerster, Morrison law.and practicing inthefi Shewasapartner 1981,Ms.In Hufstedler returned to private life, teaching by President asthefi Carter of Appealsfor 11years before accepting anappointment Circuit Court ontheNinth in1968,sheserved the Senate 1966. Nominated by President Johnsonandconfi an associate justice oftheCalifornia ofAppealin Court C r t

F i ce oftheU.S. Courts. n ONFERENCE a l . ective court-based ADRprograms inthecircuit. court-based ective i n d d

S e c 1 cantly advanced ADRscholarshipandresearch. : 2 2 ce oftheUnited States Courts. A , director oftheAdministrative WARD rst U.S. ofEducation. Secretary cantly advanced the delivery cantly advanced thedelivery ofexperienced P RESENTATIONS rm rmed by Courts. Courts. Duff James C. left, receives the2005Director’s Award Leadership forOutstanding from ClerkW.District Jr., Hamrick, ofCalifornia, Samuel District oftheSouthern Lombardi, Jr., F. withtheRobert Peckham Award forExcellence inADR. Alternative Resolution,presented E. ChiefCircuit Dispute MediatorDavid Circuit JudgeDorothy W.Senior Nelson,chairofthecircuit Committee on

CONTINUED , director oftheAdministrative, director Offi ce of the United States ce oftheUnitedStates 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 0 : 1 7

A M M A

0 2 : 0 5 :

Ninth Circuit Highlights 8 23

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 rst federal task force to study racial, study racial, to task force rst federal professionalism, and ethics in the practice of law. And and ethics in the practice of law. professionalism, 1996, 1991 to as chief judge of the Ninth from Circuit the fi he organized ethnic and gender fairness within the court religious, and in the delivery of court servicesworkforce the public. to in the rule has been involved Wallace 1972, Judge Since the concepts promote which seeks to movement, of law Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy passes the crystal Anthony M. Kennedy Associate Justice obelisk Devitt Elder Dallin on are Oaks, a retired Looking to Judge Wallace. Award Society Court, of the Utah Supreme justice Judicature left, American Neal Sonnett. President lled the Spreckels RESENTATION the to cant contributions P ord Wallace, chief judge judge chief Wallace, ord as a jurist, cant contributions WARD 3 ll other court duties. 2 : 1 c e S

A

d d n i . l a n i F

t ve in an executive role as chief circuit judge. He took He took judge. as chief circuit role in an executive ve r o EVITT p

e R

l a His original idea and subsequent work with the late Chief with the late His idea and subsequent work original the establishment of the led to E. Burger Warren Justice American Inns of Court, that now a national organization civility, excellence, to claims 75,000 members dedicated In signifi addition to has served with distinction in various Wallace Judge of the federal at the highest levels roles administrative chief two appointments from He received judiciary. Court serve of the Supreme to justices on important of the United of the Judicial Conference committees courts. the federal body for the national governing States, Judge Wallace has had a remarkable 50-year career in career a remarkable has had 50-year Wallace Judge He was appointed judge. mostly as a federal the law, district President judge in San Diego in 1970 by a U.S. the Ninth Court to Elevated Circuit Nixon. of Appeals as an active served 24 years for Wallace in 1972, Judge court, appellate federal the largest judge on the nation’s last fi hear to in 1996, but continues status” “senior semi-retired appeals and fulfi The Devitt Award, which is generally regarded as the most which is generally regarded Devitt Award, The on a member of the federal honor conferred prestigious “signifi recognizes judiciary, of the rule of the advancement administration of justice, of society as a whole.” the improvement and law, Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy of the Supreme M. Kennedy of the Supreme Anthony Justice Associate Judge to award the Court presented States of the United colleagues, hundred of several a crowd before Wallace who fi well-wishers friends and other symbol and a better teacher be a better “No one could Kennedy said of Judge Justice means,” what the award for adding that the honor was presented later Wallace, a by friends, your by colleagues, behalf of admiring “on the world.” judges around and by public grateful Theater in downtown San Diego. in downtown Theater

Senior Judge J. Cliff Senior Judge J. of the Ninthemeritus Court Circuit of Appeals, and judicial administrator jurist, a respected law, the rule of for ambassador international Society’s the American Judicature received Service Devitt Distinguished J. 2005 Edward in October in San Diego. Award Justice to D

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 24 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o Navy in 1946.Afte Navy ofjobsbeforehe heldavariety entering the required himto work from anearlyageand city’s southeastside. Family circumstances up inalow income neighborhoodonthe A SanDiegonative, Judge Wallace grew compassionate, concerned humanbeing.” of thelaw and ofjudicialsystems, butasa this pioneeringwork notonlyasastudent senior judge. …Hecontinues to perform “found newdimensionsfor therole of panelsaidJudge selection Wallace has continent. countries onevery The Devitt withjudiciariesinmoredirectly than50 countries around theworld. Hehasworked judicialsystem indeveloping impartial and and idealsofanindependentjudiciary D of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints, serving inlocaland Saints,of JesusChristtheLatter-day serving committee. intheChurch hehasbeenactive AMormon, the localchapter’s board ofdirectors andexecutive affi thelocalcommunity,In Judge Wallace hasalong to by thefederal President court Nixon in1970. un practice a partner, private remaining in where hespecialized inciviltrialmatters and later California Law Review. HejoinedaSanDiegolaw fi California ofLaw, BoaltHallSchool onthe where heserved He received hisLL.B. in1955from theUniversity of University, graduating in1952withhonorsanddistinction. heenrolled service, atSanDiegoState from military r t

F liation with the Boy Scouts of America, serving on liation withtheBoy Scouts ofAmerica,serving i n EVITT a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 2 A 4 WARD r an honorable discharge honorable discharge P RESENTATION til hisnomination became became rm,

CONTINUED D. OppermanFoundation, Minneapolis. administered withfundingprovided by by AJS theDwight of law, andtheimprovement is asawhole. ofsociety It to theadministrationof justice, advancement oftherule exemplary, measured by theirsignifi IIIjudgeswhosecareers havehonors Article been of theU.S. for ofMinnesota, Court theDistrict District named for thelate Edward J. Devitt,longtimechiefjudge system. to Justice Award,The DevittDistinguishedService members ofthepublicwhoseekto improve thejustice organization ofjudges, lawyers,nonpartisan andother founded in1913,isanindependent,national,AJS, the SanDiegoCounty BarAssociation. regional governing posts. Healsowasvice president of O’C Graber C.Tallman. andRichard andSidneyR.Thomas, pictured,Rymer andSusanP. with heronthepanelswere JudgesPamela Ann Francisco. inSan Browning U.S.Courthouse Serving panels hearingoral arguments attheJamesR. ontwo ofAppeals, serving Ninth Circuit Court O’Connor satwiththe oftheU.S.Supreme Court In October, retired AssociateJustice Sandra Day R C ETIRED IRCUIT ONNOR J C USTICE OURT S ITS

S OF

ANDRA WITH A cant contributions PPEALS N D INTH AY

0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 0 : 2 3

A M M A

5 3 : 0 5 :

Ninth Circuit Highlights 8 25

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 lmmaker Abby lmmaker action. rmative voters After ROGRAM P AY encounters with prejudice in the South. They also inquired also inquired They in the South. with prejudice encounters of judicial activism,about accusations thoughts and his Proposition California surrounding on the controversy as anti-affi many 209, seen by in 1996, Judge Henderson issued a the measure approved ruling blocking the Ninth by enactment, reversed but was CourtCircuit of Appeals. judges also participated other federal in the Law Several leading the courtroom discussions with the program, Day of government representatives help of local attorneys, In Oakland, they included and other volunteers. agencies, Jensen, Bankruptcy Judge Lowell Senior District Judge D. Wilken. and District Judge Claudia A. Tchaikovsky J. Leslie Senior District led by the sessions were In San Francisco, Judges Maria-Elena and Magistrate Judge Marilyn Hall Patel Laporte. James and Elizabeth D. and Technical Oakland were schools this year Participating McClymonds high schools of Oakland; High Piedmont RichmondSchool High of Piedmont; School of Richmond; the Creek. Students from Walnut High SchoolAcalanes of Windrush School in Oakland Day and campuses of Park K-8 also attended. School in El Cerrito from were in San Francisco the program Students attending Valley Visitacion Lilienthal ElementaryClaire School and Middle both of San Francisco. School, Senior fi District by Henderson joined Judge Thelton E. Armstrong. left, and District Brown Judge Saundra Ginzberg, D AW lm lm’s lm’s also L lm, such lm, outh. It rmative action. rmative NSPIRES and Proposition shing, I ILM lm, “Soul of Justice: Thelton Thelton “Soul of Justice: lm, hoses at and letting dogsre F in the South.ects segregation of racial 5 2 : 1 c e S

c details about Judge Henderson’s personal c details about Judge Henderson’s

d d n i . l a n

i F

t of racial discrimination Judgelm depicted the forms a knee on how injurylm recounts sidelined Judge r o

OCUMENTARY p e R

l

a D The fi The S Henderson observed while working in the decisions on controversial discussed some of the judge’s the Prison, State Bay issues such as prisoner abuse at Pelican of dolphins during tuna fi protection against affi initiative voter 209, the California fi black-and-white the 1960s era Especially struck by blasting fi of police footage to students wanted many loose on civil rights protestors, know specifi The fi The him to and caused career football college Henderson’s his acceptance in turn led him to That on academics. focus of California at the University at Boalt Hall School of Law a job at for While at Boalt, he was recruited in Berkeley. the Department as the Kennedy administration of Justice the eff investigated “Particularly with the minority students, I hope I emerge I hope I with the minority“Particularly students, “When I Judge Henderson said. as a kind model,” of role be a to if I had said I wanted school, law from graduated put me in a straight jacket. It have they’d judge, federal It today.” at that time. is conceivable was not conceivable students were “Soul of Justice,” of the screening Following of Judge Henderson and the fi ask questions able to at Day Law Nearly 190 eighth-gradestudents attended Courthouse in Building and U.S. the Philip Burton Federal 250 high school In addition, approximately San Francisco. Dellums V. held at the Ronald at the event students were Courthouse in Oakland. Building and U.S. Federal Henderson’s American Journey,” which chronicles the life the life which chronicles American Journey,” Henderson’s Watts in the his youth judge from of the San Francisco as an African-American his days to Angeles, section of Los his decisions on the to in the 1960s, lawyer government bench. federal divided Students then Ginzberg. Abby producer/director fi raised in the discuss issues of law to groups into protection. and environmental prison reform, as civil rights, More than 400 students from schools in San Francisco Francisco schools in San from than 400 students More which included aand Oakland program, the attended of a documentaryshowing fi Many federal courts in the Ninth Circuit set aside time each May to observe Law Day with courts observe to Day May aside time each set Law federal Ninth Circuit in the Many this program NorthernThe District California’s of students. young for programs educational times of Senior and Districtlife the Judge was particularly its subjectyear for matter, noteworthy Henderson. E. Thelton

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 26 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o Extensive screening ofimmigration caseswasbegunso for oftime limits to respond oralextensions to motions. notifi adopted ageneral order establishing astreamlined manage theinfl hasimplemented variousinnovationsThe to court meaning withoutbenefi that35to 40percentfact ofallappeals are fi fi continue to amountto 37.4percent ofthetotal appeals Appeals,of Immigration orBIA,were down in2006,they takenbyto theBoard 2005.And whileappealsofactions at aphenomenalrate, increasing 626percent from 2001 Circuit’sThe Ninth immigration caseloadhadbeenrising Pacifi Circuit’s inninewestern 15judicialdistricts states andtwo Committee, whichrepresents thefederal barintheNinth LLP, chairoftheLawyer Representatives Coordinating attorney Peg Carew Toledo Herrington &Sutcliff ofOrrick, Attorney SusanGelmisand SacramentoSupervising Helping organize thesessionswere Circuit Ninth extensive useoflaw schoolclinicsandpro bonoagencies. mediation, amicusbriefs, remands to theagency, and more Circuitto program supplementtheNinth by adding to focus onmentoring. Suggestionsalsowere received provide anindependentstaff Eff appellants. training ofpro bono attorneys to represent immigrant The mostpromising oftheminvolves mentoring and discussionsproduced ofideas.The avariety wide-ranging with pro bonoprograms. specializing inimmigration, andmajorcorporate law fi legal aidsocieties, barassociationgroups, law fi immigration judges, andrepresentatives oflaw schools, included staff Browning U.S. inSanFrancisco. Courthouse The group attheJamesR. in meetingsheldMay andOctober Dozens oflawyers from fi immigration fi eff while continuing to therightsofwould-be respect residents andasylumseekers. 2006,that In hardAppeals hasbeenworking to fi As thefederal withthemostimmigration of appeals, Circuit circuit Court theNinth court I r led with the court. led withthecourt. The problem iscompounded by the t DEAS

F orts are currently underwayorts to obtainfundingto i ort included ort “brainstorming” attorneys sessionswithsomeofthemostknowledgeable inthe n a l . cation system for stays ofremoval andproviding c Island jurisdictions. c Islandjurisdictions. i n d d

S e c S 1 : 2 6 attorneys ofappeals, from federal thecourt ET ux ofimmigration initially cases. It eld. F ORTH t oflegalcounsel. ve western states participated person outside of the court personoutsideofthecourt

FOR M ANAGING led pro se, nd innovative newways to expedite thelegalprocess rms rms e I MMIGRATION potentially meritorious claimsare remanded to theagency Andwhencaseswithmeritor mediation atthecourt. not applyto casesinwhichlawyers are neededto facilitate an appellate panel. The guaran to makeoral arguments beforeguaranteed theopportunity to immigration casesrecognized to have meritand When available, pro bonoattorneys are assigned practice. for attorneys newto immigration law and/orappellate has sponsored anumberofimmigration workshops multiple caseshaving common issues. also The court could identifyandsimultaneouslyprocessthat thecourt C ASELOAD tee oforalargument does 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 0 : 3 6

A M M A

9 3 : 0 5 :

Ninth Circuit Highlights 8 27

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 ce for for ce The immigration The immigration session, brainstorming held in May at the James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse in drew San Francisco, of attorneysdozens knowledgeable in law. immigration at the sessions t agencies represented key cases that, once decided, can set precedent guiding can set precedent decided, that, once key cases Other of others. cases should of hundreds the resolution ones are until the precedent-setting abeyance be held in he added. decided, and non-profi Public School of at Davis of California included the University and its Immigration of Arizona’s the University Clinic; Law of of Idaho College Clinic; the University Law Immigration operated Program Access Aid Clinic; the Legal Legal Law’s Offi Executive Department of Justice’s the U.S. by Review;Immigration Aid Society the Legal Diego; of San the Northwest Immigrant in Seattle; Rights the Project Immigrant in Santa Ana; the Florence Center Law Public Angeles the Los in Arizona; and Refugee Rights Project Center; Law Counsel the Public Bar Association; County Civil for Committee the Lawyers’ San Francisco, from and, and the Center Resource Rights, the Immigration Legal Caucus. Law Asian orts identify to 7 2 the demanding work insight into ered : 1 c e S

d d n i . l a n i F

t r o p e R

l Another panelist was San Francisco attorney Marc Van Der Van Marc attorney Another panelist was San Francisco the and sits on law in immigration Hout, who specializes Immigration of the American Lawyers of governors board eff continuing He encouraged Association. of immigration judges. In her prepared remarks, she remarks, In her prepared judges. of immigration “strange court a described immigration proceedings The law.” and criminal civil, of administrative, hybrid but is not court tribunal, an administrative is technically discovery and provides lacks formal the APA, by governed after immediately orally, be delivered to most decisions for a proceeding. Among the panelists participatingAmong the in the brainstorming Marks Immigration Judge Dana Leigh sessions was U.S. vice and current president a former of San Francisco, of Immigration of the National Association president who off Judges, for further proceedings, the court furtherfor lawyers does not appoint proceedings, courts in other proceedings or agency for proceedings. a

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 28 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o creation ofgangaffi monitoring device, usingglobal-positioningsatellite tracking The conference closedwithpresentations ongang-off Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute. prosecutions underthefederal Infl Racketeer criminal enterprises involving motorcycle gangs, andsuccessful West andEastcoasts, includingthoseoperatinginprisons, and Discussions focused onracially- andethnic-basedgangsonthe Investigation andmembersoftheU.S. Service. Marshals Federal Bureau ofPrisons, agentsfrom theFederal Bureau of agents from ofCorrections theCalifornia andthe Department included Los police andcounty detectives, Angelescity special presenters, speakers, andfacilitators throughout theevent. They specialistsfromGang local, state, andfederal as agenciesserved and Probation Administrator Diblasi. Michelle Los AngelesPolice Assistant ChiefJimMcDonnell, Department Alicemarie H.Stotler, Los AngelesCounty Sheriff Judge ChiefDistrict Guest speakersincludedCentral District event inLos Angeles. 300 pretrial andprobation offi behavior, trends, andtechnology, andresources for identifi judiciary’s fi Pretrial andprobation offi services 2006 N r t

F i n Bryant Garth. Bryant andtechnologylaw.the emergence ofentertainment Pictured above Judge Alicemarie are H.StotlerandSouthweste ChiefDistrict andcommunity, onpanelsthatdiscussedhistorical changeinthecourt participated ofAppeals desegreg the NinthCircuit Court symposiumforthebench,barandlawstudents. Federal inLosLaw School hostedaone-day Angeles judges fromcou the district fortheCentral ofCalifornia. To Court District 2006 marked oftheU.S.District the40thanniversary celebrate themilestone C a l . i n ENTRAL d d

S e c 1 : 2 8 rst ever Symposium, focusing NationalGang ofgang onsharingknowledge D ATIONAL ISTRICT liation databasesandoffi

OF C G ALIFORNIA cers from districts across the country attended theMaycers 31-June across from thecountry districts 2 ANG cers for ofCalifornia theCentral District hosted thefederal cer safety. S uenced and C Leroy D. Baca, YMPOSIUM ELEBRATES ender ender 40 TH the Central ofCalifornia. District sponsored by andProbation theU.S.Pretrial offi Services Symposiumtheir knowledge ofgangsataNationalGang Federal andlocal lawenforcement offi A cation and supervision. More than cation andsupervision. NNIVERSARY cers enhanced , Southwestern ation and rt and rt rn Dean rn Dean 0 8 ces for / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 0 : 4 2

A M Space and Facilities

Courtrooms in the new Eugene courthouse feature natural lighting.

2006 Annual Report Final.indd Sec1:29 08/20/2007 8:50:52 AM 2 0 0 6

A n 30 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o attorney andU.S. andotherfederal Service, tenants. Marshals chambers, plusoffi andmagistrate judges,two apiece andseven bankruptcy for judicial district, space onfi risesto aheightof69feetnew courthouse andhas270,000square feet ofgross Built on4.5acres oflandalongthe Willamette indowntown River Eugene, the overall.project the building. Administration managedthe$92-million The General Services to createwho alsohelpedrecruit several well-known artists original works for input from theseniorfederal R.Hogan, judgeinEugene, JudgeMichael District Renowned architect thedesign withconsiderableThom Mayne supervised U.S. Green BuildingCouncil. nominated for anumberofarchitectural awards andbeenrecognized by the technology.and thelatest inenergy conserving The buildinghasbeen walls, anemphasisonnatural lighting uniquedesign withcurving a strikingly set anewstandard for modernpublicbuildings. featuresThe newcourthouse theeyesIn ofmany, the Wayne Lyman U.S. Morse inEugene has Courthouse Ninth Circuit in2006. inthe completedspace andfacilitiesprojects orundertaken renovation andseismicretrofi inEugene,A newfederal courthouse Oregon, andacourthouse E r t

F i UGENE n funding asrequired. Circuit receiveensuring thatNinth projects and priority Administrative Offi projects. This committee also works closelywiththe ensure thatcourt’s requirements are metinallbuilding to resolve issuesrelated to andto space andsecurity Administration (GSA) units Services assistingcourt The committee alsoistheliaisonwithGeneral ceilings, andexpenditures offundingfor construction. releases, furniture parking, expenditures over thecost build-to-suits, leaserenewals, space expansionsand andlease projects includingmajorprospectus projects is responsible for reviewing andapproving allnew matters related to space andsecurity. This committee policiesandguidelinesinall responsibilities ofjudiciary the JudicialCouncil Circuit withoversight oftheNinth CommitteeThe onbehalfof Space andSecurity acts N a l . i n d INTH d

S e c ve ve fl 1 : 3 C 0 C oors, plusonelevel provides ofsecure It sixcourtrooms, parking. IRCUIT ce space for the district and bankruptcy clerks, theU.S.ce space for andbankruptcy thedistrict OURTHOUSE ce oftheUnited States Courts S PACE

AND t in Seattle topped thelistof t inSeattle S D ECURITY EDICATED C OMMITTEE in Bakersfi for and site selection anotherleased space courthouse inleasedspace inGreat Falls,a newcourthouse Mont.; U.S. bidding forof theNakamura inSeattle; Courthouse projects, includingrenovation and seismicretrofi During theyear, thecommittee alsomonitored other andotherfacilities. courthouses about controlling for therent paidby thejudiciary GSA, membersofCongress andcongressional staff also hasbeeninvolved indiscussionswiththe for buildingmaterials andservices. The committee have risendramatically asaresult ofincreased demand San DiegoandLos Angeles. Costs for bothprojects in focused onthechallengesfacingnewcourthouses ofArizona, was Stephen oftheDistrict M.McNamee 2006,thecommittee,In chaired Judge by District eld. construction, was amongthespeakers. designand ofthecourthouse aspects R.Hogan,closelyinvolvedMichael inall top.the newcourthouse, Judge District Students cuttheceremonial ribbonopening tting

0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 0 : 5 3

A M M A

9 5 : 0 5 Space and Facilities : 8 31

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 erent and is ce 1 3 : 1 c e S

d hoping the courthousecials are will help d n i . l a n i F

t r o p e R

l a trigger new economic development in the city’s oldest in the city’s development trigger new economic the designate far as to gone so have They industrial area. which will eventually District,” “Courthouse as the area Eugene offi Eugene images, depending on where the viewer stands, and a geometrically and a geometrically stands, the viewer depending on where images, at the building entrance. challenging metal sculpture 1 dedication the Dec. than 500 people attended More Gordon Senator U.S. made by were Remarks ceremony. District Judge of Eugene, DeFazio Peter Smith and Rep. chair of the Ninth M. McNameeStephen of Arizona, Mayor Eugene and Security Space Committee, Circuit and Judge Hogan. GSA Regional Mayne Mr. Kitty Piercy, managed the program. Jon Kvistad Administrator Morse, Lyman Wayne the late namesake, building’s The School dean who Law of Oregon University is a former 1945 Senate from in the U.S. the state represented until 1969. He served as a Republican, an independent in offi during his 24 years and a Democrat take who would as an outspoken lawmaker remembered unpopular positions based on his principles. The courthouse’s striking design has already won several architectural architectural several striking won design has already The courthouse’s than $1 million in public art, The project included more prizes. diff glass showing with lenticular including two long light boxes

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 32 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o during construction. Some historic Some during construction. removed andwillbecarefully stored paneling, fi spaces. items Historic suchasfurniture, andotherinterior the courtrooms The willincluderestoring project leased space inthedowntown area. circuit mediator are currently located in with offi along judges andcourtroom Oregon. Its with additionalfi from Washington, IdahoandMontana about 350casesperyear, mostofthem regularly inSeattle, hearingargument in the early1970s. now meetsThe court since been hearingcasesinSeattle ofAppealshas Circuit The Court Ninth for completion infall2008. budget of$51millionandisscheduled whichhasain planningtheproject, havechambers inSeattle participated Circuit judgeswithresidentNinth ofAppeals. Circuitby Court theNinth Washington, willbeusedinthefuture for Court the District Western of District building, whichformerly housedtheU.S. U.S.Kenzo Nakamura Courthouse. The retrofi the year ontherenovation andseismic Seattle, theGSAbeganworkIn late in areas. thedowntownconnect to theriverfront r t

F i n a l . i n t of the 66-year-old t ofthe66-year-old William d d ces and for theclerkofcourt

S e c 1 xtures anddoorshavextures been : 3 2 lings from Alaska and lings from Alaska Honor for hisheroism in World War II. Class William ofSeattle, whowasawarded Kenzo Nakamura of theMedal wasrededicatedThe in2001the nameofPrivate courthouse First Register Places ofHistoric in1980,for itsnationalandlocalsignifi inthenation. courthouse waslisted intheNational The courthouse and, as afederal atthetime, courthouse onlythesecond single-use deco style. It wasthefi deco style. It exemplifi U.S.The design wascompleted Nakamura in1940.Its Courthouse courthouse. pieces willneedto berepaired andrestored before beingreturned to the inthecountry. asastandalonefederalserve courthouse wasBuilt in1940,theNakamura inSeattle thefi U.S.Courthouse es thefederal government’s austere interpretation oftheart rst buildinginthe West designed specifi rst building designed to rst buildingdesignedto cally cance. 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 0 3

A M M A

4 0 : 1 5 Space and Facilities : 8 33

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 HASE Great Falls U.S. Courthouse 48,411 Gross Square Footage: 2009 Project Completion Date: with Architects: BC Development LLCArchitects, Wysocki Hoefer P ESIGN D IN

3 3 : 1 c e S

d d n i . l a n i

F

t r o OURTHOUSES p

e R

l a

Great Falls Great C

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 34 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o Los Angeles San Diego C r t

F i n OURTHOUSES a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 3 4

IN D ESIGN P HASE Architects: Gross SquareFootage:1,016,300 U.S. Courthouse LOS ANGELES

CONTINUED Partners Architects: RichardMeier& Gross SquareFootage:619,644 U.S. Courthouse SAN DIEGO Perkins &WillArchitecture 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 0 9

A M The Work of the Courts

Judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

2006 Annual Report Final.indd Sec1:35 08/20/2007 8:51:10 AM 2 0 0 6

A n 36 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o original appeals. *This tableincludes appealsreopened, remanded, andreinstated (afterbeingterminated duetoprocedural defaults) aswell as TABLE 2:Filings,Terminations andPending CasesbyAppealType, 2006 fi The Circuit downturn innewNinth fi The numberofappealsfi C and Second Circuitand Second since 2002,whenthe phenomenally for Circuit boththeNinth appeals hadgrownImmigration fi amounting to 37.4percent ofthetotal ofnewappeals,the largest category appeals con percent from theyear before. BIA BIA, numbered 5,166in2006,down 22 the Board Appeals, ofImmigration or takenbyto 2005.Appeals ofactions increased by 626percent from 2001 in immigration appeals, whichhad percent ofthenationaltotal. adecrease.reporting CircuitThe continued Ninth to have thelargest share ofnewfi 2005. Appellate fi r lings. lings isattributableto adrop off t rst timeinfi Type ofAppeal National Total Circuit as% of Ninth 823 Appellate Total National 870 Circuit Total 143 Proceedings 180 *Original Appeals Administrative Bankruptcy Other 633 Criminal 390 682 605 Private Civil Other U.S. Other Civil Petitions Private Prisoner Petitions U.S. Prisoner Civil

F i n OURT a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 3

6 tinued to constitute OF ve years. 13,828newfi reported The court A lings were down 9 percent nationally with every appellate court in the country lings were inthecountry down appellate 9percent court nationallywithevery 0036,7 90 3046,9 .%5,6 523-7.2% 55,253 2.2% 59,569 17,151 7.4% 16,782 67,699 0.8% 63,024 13,470 13,363 -9.0% 63,676 70,003 -14.1% 13,828 16,101 Filings 30 17 .%2.%1.%11 82 10 2.9% 31.0% 28.2% 1.1% 19.9% 21.0% 1.3% 21.7% 23.0% ,7 ,4 2.%3.%49552663 ,1 ,8 0.8% 8,486 8,419 6.3% -9.8% 2,306 5,276 7.7% 2,556 2,786 16.7% 4,965 21.1% 2,588 1,918 38.6% -11.3% 2,407 1,644 -22.3% -0.2% 1,867 5,340 1,987 6,870 2,004 2,106 15.6% 2,008 -15.6% 14.9% 2,155 -3.8% 16.5% 2,553 2,067 3.9% 2,149 2,277 2,192 2005 PPEALS led withtheU.S. ofAppealsfor Circuit declinedfor theNinth Court the Filings 2006

S 2005-06 TATISTICS Change 2.%10 0 5 2.%2624-5.1% 224 236 -24.4% 155 -4.8% 205 357 1.0% 375 -20.6% -30.2% 413 592 2.8% -35.5% 54 .%8980-.%28221.8% 222 218 -2.3% 820 14.2% 839 852 6.0% 746 -5.4% -20.1% 528 661 4.6% -7.2% *Total pendingcases forcalendar year 2005revised. TABLE 1:AppellateCaseloadProfile,2005-2006 decisions with minimal explanation, virtually assuringsubsequentappeal decisions withminimalexplanation,virtually court. The BIAinstituted anexpedited review system, rendering often immigrants canappealsuchdecisions, fi intheU.S.denied residency by afederal immigration judge. Would-be was ordered ofcasesinvolving to clearabacklog foreign nationals ofHomelandSecurity) oftheDepartment apart Immigration Service, (now theU.S.Immigration andNaturalizationService Citizenship and PnigCss1,9 7112.1% 0.8% 17,151 13,470 -14.1% 16,793 13,363 *Pending Cases 13,828 Terminations Filings 16,101 % ofCircuit Total Terminated 2005 lings in2006,down 14.1percent from Terminated 0520 Change2005-2006 2006 2005 2006 2005-06 Change rst to BIA,thento afederal circuit Pending 2005 lings, 21.7 Pending 2006 2005-06 Change 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 1 2

A M M A

3 1 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 37

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 . 0 ling of a lings. of nal disposition and the Districtlings, of the Ninthnal disposition by the District by of followed lings, Number of MonthsNumber fi of appeal to ling of a notice Ninth Circuit National 2005 2006 2005 2006 with criminal appeals second rst with 5,276 or 39 percent; serves Southern some 18 million people living in seven counties. California The appeals in 2006. districts more generated Three the Districtnumber of appeals from of Montana increased 384 fi to 37.6 percent to 151 fi to Idaho with 25.8 percent Northern 13 fi to 7.7 percent Mariana Islands to Another 6,421 cases were terminated on the merits, 1,774 on the merits, terminated Another 6,421 cases were and 4,647 cases after submission ofcases after argument oral 410. numbered consolidation disposed of by Cases briefs. the Ninth Courta case by Circuit 15.5 of Appeals was before. 16.6 the year to months in 2006, compared the median time interval the fi from However, court fi case in a lower to 33 to in 2006 compared 34.2 months longer, grew Circuit the by additional time was accrued The months in 2005. courts. lower Terminations and Pending Cases and Pending Terminations the court by numbered number of appeals terminated The while the number of 13,470 in 2006, up 0.8 percent, 17,151. to 2.1 percent pending cases rose appeals ranked administrative Among appeals terminated, fi with third prisoner appeals private 2,407 or 17.9 percent; fourth civil and other private with 2,004 or 14.9 percent; cases 6,639 Of 1,867 or 13.9 percent. the appeals terminated, judges and court by terminations staff procedural involved Median Time Intervals long it Median how time intervals, which measure the judicial system, through proceed to a case takes for median time intervalThe level. at the appellate improved fi from lings, lings, lings, up lings, lings in lings lings. lings. ve years. ve the year lings for led, the largest the led, fi enses with 306 in 1,023 of or defendant enses with 220 fi criminal immigration lings, 823 cases led in 2006 numbered propertylings, off lings. 7 3 : 1 c e S

d d n i . l a enses with 678 fi n i F

t off and explosives rearms r o p e fi enses with 499 R

From Notice of Appeal to Filing Last Brief Filing of Appeal to Notice From Hearing or Submission Last Brief to Filing From Disposition Final Hearing to From Disposition Final Submission to From Disposition Final of Appeal to of Notice Filing From Disposition in Court Final to in Lower Filing From CourtAppellate 6.0 6.0 16.6 6.6 6.1 15.5 1.3 0.2 4.3 5.6 12.1 1.2 0.2 4.2 5.8 12.1 2.2 0.5 33.0 2.1 0.5 34.2 27.2 27.4 By Stage of Appeal l a Appeals of cases originating in the federal district in the federal courtsAppeals of cases originating 8 percent 7,522 in 2006, down numbered in the circuit one District Central California, of The the prior year. from trial courts againof the busiest federal in the nation, once the circuit, number of appeals for the largest generated 2006 District’s Central The total. of the 2,020, or 14.6 percent courtThe the prior year. from 12.7 percent was down total District Courts as Sources of Appeals Criminal appeals, which took a big jump in 2005, were a big jump in 2005, were which took Criminal appeals, criminal fi Total in 2006. 15.6 percent down Breakdown of New Appeals of appeals fi Among the various categories which includes BIA appeals. appeals, was administrative of all new fi 5,340 or 38.6 percent numbered They 2006. criminal appeals involved most numerous The 2,155. were drug off off to the circuit court. What had been a small but steady streamWhat had been a small but steady court. the circuit to fi litigation over of torrent a of cases turned into Original proceedings fi proceedings Original from down total, of the circuit 6 percent to and amounted 2005. and fi federal The 5,367. were the year civil appeals for Total was either a plaintiff government 4,344, cases numbered Private or 19 percent. those cases, prisoner petitions cases, private Among or 81 percent. single category the largest with 2,277 fi constituted Civil rights appeals ranked the prior year. from 3.9 percent with 836 fi second TABLE 3: Median Time Intervals, Calendar Years 2005 and 2006 Time Intervals, 3: Median Calendar Years TABLE

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 38 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o under IRS. are shown underBoard ofImmigration andU.S. Tax Appeals isshown Court Administrative as immigration cases (INS) agency previously reported service terminated duetoprocedural defaults) appeals aswell asoriginalappeals. *This tableincludesappealsreopened, remanded, andreinstated (afterbeing TABLE 4:SourceofAppealsandOriginalProceedings,2006 thanthenationalaverage.quickly submitted onthebriefs, however, Circuit resolved theNinth casesmore and preparing thecasefor or hearingorsubmission.Once heard incourt for briefi ofAppealshadlongermediantimeintervals Circuit Court toa caseinlower fi court ofappeals,of thecaseby acircuit and27.4monthsfrom court fi median timesof12.1monthsfrom notice ofappealto fi for Circuit were theNinth timeintervals Median longerthanthenational C r t BA51637.4% 0.5% 13,828 37.4% 5,166 65 1.0% 0.2% 823 0.6% 3.2% 0.2% 1.6% 143 26 3.3% 86 0.1% 38.6% 4.0% Circuit Total 442 23 2.8% 223 1.1% *Original Proceedings 459 Administrative Other Agencies 1.3% 5,340 14 553 BIA 4.1% NationalLaborRelationsBoard 384 151 6.2% IRS 5.5% 181 Administrative Agencies, Total 567 Bankruptcy 14.6% 5.7% 857 Islands Mariana Northern 756 Guam 2,020 W. Wash. 784 E. Wash. %of Total Oregon Nevada Appeals Montana Idaho Hawaii S. Calif. N. Calif. 0.8% E. Calif. C. Calif. Arizona 105 Alaska District

F i n OURT a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 3

8 OF A PPEALS nal disposition by a circuit court. nal dispositionby acircuit court. The Ninth S TATISTICS

CONTINUED nal disposition ling of ng argument washeard. the merits, including45inwhichoral grounds, 1,973caseswere decidedon cases were terminated onprocedural pro secasesin2006. While mostofthe CircuitThe disposedof5,171 Ninth respectively. se fi and second amongcategories ofpro and administrative appealsranked fi caseload. Private prisonerpetitions and accounted for 38.2percent ofthe 2005, pro sefi percent oftheappellate caseload. In the prioryear, butaccounted for 40.8 5,639 in2006,down 8.4percent from caseload. Pro sefi Circuit’s oftheNinth portion appellate counsel, continue to represent alarge isnotrepresented by legalparty Pro seappeals, inwhichatleastone Pro SeFilingsandTerminations Circuit. oftheNinth courts from district appellate panels, including47judges designated Circuit to sitonNinth During theyear, visitingjudgeswere nearly 38percent of thosecases. merits andwere listed asauthorsin percent ofallcasesterminated onthe committees, in32.3 theyparticipated and variousadministrative court on screening andmotionspanels additionto serving Appeals in2006.In of Circuitwork Court oftheNinth make amajorcontribution to the circuitSenior judgescontinued to Visiting Judges Contributions bySeniorJudgesand lings with1,907and1,883cases, lings numbered 6,158 lings numbered 0 8

/ 2 0 / 2 rst 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 1 3

A M M A

3 1 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 39

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / er 8 0 lings. lings. ce of ce gures gures Change 2005-2006 ect changes in the were transfers) lings (excluding Offi the Administrative enses by 12 and down cases, and explosives rearms 2005 2006 11.48 11.16 -2.8% 13,808 12,672 -8.2% fi enses and 2,813, illegal reentry an alien, which numbered ense, by exclude transfer cases. They also refl They cases. transfer exclude of off categorization off largest The the prior year. from respectively, 12.5 percent, numerically was seen in one type of immigration increase off fi These 2005. from or 0.01 percent up 27 cases, the U.S. Courts. the U.S. criminal fi Nationwide, 68,488 in 2005. District from 3.5 percent 66,094, down enses, which enses, disposition)ling to disposition)ling to which totaled enses, umbers of drug ILINGS in the districtlings courts in 2006, held steady of the Ninth Circuit F disposition) ling to disposition)ling to in 2006. 7 percent by lings increased OURT 9 3 : or 23.3 percent. lings, 1 lings in the circuit. The largest categories of categories largest The lings in the circuit. C c e S

d d lings in district courts numbered of the circuit of the total 23.3 percent lings constituted n i . l a n off and drug or 36.4 percent, lings, i F

t r o ISTRICT p

e R

Civil Cases fi from Total Median Months National Criminal Defendants 7.0 9.6 7.1 7.9 1.4% -17.7% Civil CasesMedian fi Months (from Criminal Defendants fi from Total Median Months National 7.0 8.4 7.1 8.3 1.4% -1.2% Civil FilingsCriminal Filings FilingsTotal Civil TerminationsCriminal Terminations TerminationsTotal Civil Cases *Pending Criminal Cases *Pending Cases Pending *Total Index (in months)Termination Civil Case Index (in months) Termination *Criminal Case IndexTermination *Overall Case Median fi Months (from 40,875 13,647 11.84 41,796 54,683 41,759 55,443 13,061 41,254 13,334 40,800 12.42 54,431 54,315 11.76 54,134 12,399 42,213 2.2% -2.3% -2.4% 54,612 -0.5% 4.9% 12.11 -2.4% -5.1% 2.3% 0.5% 3.0% l most notable in the n lings and were a totaled 2,955 fi totaled reported of criminal in 12 of 19 categories Declines were fi TABLE 5: Ninth Circuit District Courts - Total Criminal and Civil Cases Filed, Terminated and Pending Pending and Criminal and Civil Cases Filed, Terminated 5: Ninth Circuit District CourtsTABLE - Total Ending December 31, 2006 During the 12-Month Period criminal appeals were immigration off immigration criminal appeals were 12,672 in 2006, down 8.2 percent from the prior year. the prior year. from 8.2 percent 12,672 in 2006, down Criminal fi district court fi totaling 54,431, down 0.5 percent from the prior year. The 15 judicial districts 15 judicial The circuit of the prior year. the from 0.5 percent down 54,431, totaling courtfederal civil fi criminal and of 336,775 caseload of the total 16.2 percent for accounted Cases and Pending Criminal Filings, Terminations Criminal fi 4,608 fi

Criminal and civil case fi and civil case Criminal D Overall, national fi Overall, Note: Median time intervals computed only for 10 or more cases and only for 10 or more defendants. Median time intervals defendants. and only for 10 or more cases only for 10 or more Note: Median time intervals computed condemnation, prison land by district and method of disposition, excludes cases terminated, ling to disposition of civil fi from petitions, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments. Median time intervals from fi ling to fi Median time intervals from of judgments. deportation and enforcement petitions, of overpayments recovery reviews, transfers. district, excludes by disposition of criminal defendants disposed of, *2005 Revised

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 40 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o unweighted civil, criminal, and revocation fi lingsmaynotequal totalsfor weighted andunweighted lings. fi activitiesconducted by residentof trialsandother court andvisiting judges. torounding, Due subtotals forweighted and previously notpresented inthistable. are obtainedfrom Data themonthlyreports andnon-evidentiary) (both evidentiary releaseexcluded. andprobation hearings forsupervised are Thistableexcludes reported Data datafortheterritorialcourts. off petty Litigation.Thistableincludes defendantsinallfelonyandClassAmisdemeanor cases, butincludesonlythose Multi-district This tableexcludes civilcases arisingby reopening, remand, or transfer tothedistrictby theorder oftheJudicialPanel on Note: Case case weights are weighting basedonthe2003-2004districtcourt studyconducted by theFederal JudicialCenter. the Western of District Washington, whichhad1,072 California, whichhad1,087newcases, down 19percent; signifi 3,959 casesfi 3,500 fi Arizona hadthelargest numericaldecrease, reporting inthecircuit. courts by 13of15district of The District Signifi nationally in2006. cases and17.1percent ofthedrugoff 28.8percentThey reported ofthecriminalimmigration national criminalcaseload, down 1percent from lastyear. Circuit accounted oftheNinth forcourts 19percent ofthe D During the12-MonthPeriod EndingDecember31,2006 -WeightedTABLE 6:NinthCircuitDistrictCourts andUnweightedFilingsPer Judgeship Authorized r t

District en**34193.045391546 7 8 -0.4% 1.0% 480 -0.8% 485 478 487 490 4.60 -8.8% 483 -16.7% -0.8% -3.5% 5.74 105 1.0% 611 287 6,331 7.03 369 579 109 485 -1.1% 557 495 6,280 239 117 -12.7% 301 31.70 559 443 490 472 91.42 360 5.74 19.8% 7.35 371 23.1% 514 129 37.14 6.96 1,516 438 4.48 139 12.3% 369 -4.9% 48.75 528 4,674 324 334 93 6,680 132 412 109 3.7% 5.32 848 79 140 546 147 601 442 *** 634 650 291 -18.4% 5.17 443 299 406 191 318 37.14 570 132 952 519 13.96 656 1,909 *** 438 49.50 4.51 90 Mean 301 48.50 4,140 *** 198 201 National 31.29 436 8.25 159 229 113 535 4.43 Median 47 110 363 132 319 Circuit 36.00 269 137 3.06 89 177 Mean 599 14.61 560 390 46 36.50 Circuit 7 595 318 140 766 Total 4 99.23 53 469 1,046 238 Circuit 113 6 208 32.14 260 472 W. Wash. 142 58.67 7 283 246 170 E. Wash. 204 31.29 725 58 3 2 Oregon 215 209 20.33 104.15 Nevada 4 505 53 779 Montana 13 330 Idaho 67 387 14 Hawaii 6 291 117 S. Calif. 28 N. Calif. 13 E. Calif. 3 C. Calif. Arizona Alaska F i n ISTRICT a l . i n cantly from theprioryear intheCentral of District cant decreases incriminalcasefi d d lings in2006,down 11.6percent from the

ense defendantswhosecases have beenassignedtodistrictjudges. Remandsandreopens forcriminal defendantsare

S e c 1 : 4 0 Judgeships Judgeships led theyear before. Filings alsodecreased Authorized C OURT Civil negtdFlnsPrJdehpWeighted Filings Per Judgeship Unweighted Filings Per Judgeship F ILINGS Criminal 5 90 1 1 5 .83747-9.6% 417 377 7.58 154 215 415 49.00 158 ense casesfi lings were reported

Supervised Supervised CONTINUED ernsTtlCvlCriminal Civil Total Hearings Release Release led the Southern District ofCalifornia. District the Southern 52.2 and39.7percent, respectively, ofthecaseloadin percent, respectively, ofthecaseloadinArizona, and Immigration anddrugoffenses madeup56and19 two “border courts” ontheU.S.-Mexican border. continued to bemostnumerous inthecircuit’s New filingsfor immigration anddrugoffenses 6.8 percent to 126cases. 14.7 percent to ofGuam,up 2,763cases, andtheDistrict ofCalifornia,by District theSouthern whichsaw fi The onlyincreases incriminalcasefi California, whichhad879newcases, down 9.9percent. new cases, down 11.3percent; of andtheEastern District Supervised Hearings Release Release Weighted 2006 Total lings were reported Weighted 2005 Total 2005-2006 lings rise Change 0 8

/ 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 1 3

A M M A

3 1 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 41

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 1,237 1,718 lings. Prisoner Prisoner lings. West. West. Wash. GU NMI Total been that have ense cases in the or defendant East. Wash. 15.7 civil rights, lings were lings in district courts of the circuit. The U.S. U.S. The lings in district courts of the circuit. nationally in 2006, which were up 10 percent over the the over up 10 percent in 2006, which were nationally prior year. of all 78.7 percent for cases accounted civil Private new civil fi acteda plaintiff as government remaining 21.3 percent of the new fi percent 21.3 remaining civil of all new private 31.4 percent petitions made up Other major year. the prior slightly from down cases, of new civil fi categories personal injury percent; percent; 13.2 of all types, So. So. Calif. HI ID MT NV OR 1,108 5 2 8 13 162 7 69 12 0 1,795 No. Calif. East. Calif. Calif. Cent. lings in district courts 3,491 1,066 872 601 2,755 346 212 382 459 657 384 1,057 124 17 12,576 which in years consecutive ve AK AZ 1 4 : 1 enses c e enses 18 52 53 17 45 11 9 8 13 9 15 2 17 0 9 278 enses 25 196 86 79 57 16 29 31 77 100 91 91 86 16 0 980 S

enses d lings in district courts of the Ninth Circuit enses 5 12 34 24 24 14 10 3 15 12 7 7 68 2 0 237 d enses n rst upturn after fi i enses 9 2 2 25 18 0 14 0 0 0 0 1 259 9 0 339 . l enses a n enses 10 56 61 78 31 11 11 15 41 19 37 15 23 1 0 409 i enses Total enses 153 F

lings had declined. The circuit accounted for 15.5 15.5 for accounted circuit The lings had declined. t r c Off c o p enses 3 30 19 18 13 20 1 3 4 8 11 13 18 1 1 163 e R

Immigration Off Violent OffViolent All Other Drugs and Firearms OffExplosives 38 300 System Justice 112Off 159Improper Alien 71Reentry 400Other 103 33 70 95 7 113 1,635 2 45 163 326 161 192 47 15 97 3 4 334 4 30 63 26 80 43 148 21 0 0 2,813 HomicideRobberyAssaultOther 0Property Off Larceny Burglary, 31 6& Theft 3 9 1Embezzlement 104Fraud 0 31 1 & Forgery 9 20 5Counterfeiting 14 8 0 12Other 9 12 10Drug Off 97 13 2 2 2 11 3Marijuana 13 53 6 238 2 1 13 21 3 330 46 5 2 35 11 0 11 133 9 0 2 9 1 25 Off Sex 16 5 7 37 25 135 0 360 2 3 51 11 3 6 6 1 93 2 2 45 5 3 4 35 5 0 2 7 3 47 5 18 5 12 2 10 2 60 3 2 23 3 12 3 56 0 2 5 6 30 698 63 0 2 0 3 5 37 3 2 9 14 0 6 201 2 2 0 3 11 56 182 4 66 7 2 219 11 0 0 54 1 4 4 1 0 16 3 0 0 3 539 1,309 9 1 59 92 0 1 33 0 1 17 86 0 0 0 46 RegulatoryOff General Off Traffi All Off l a assigned to district judges. Note: This table includes all felony and Class A misdemeanor cases but includes only those petty off Note: This table includes all felony and Class A misdemeanor cases TABLE 7: Ninth Circuit District Courts - Types of Criminal Cases Commenced, by Major Offense and District Commenced, by Major Offense of Criminal Cases 7: Ninth Circuit District CourtsTABLE - Types 2006 (Excluding Transfers), percent of the 270,171 civil fi of percent Civil case fi It 2005. from 41,759, up 2.2 percent in 2006 numbered was the fi civil fi Civil Filings, Terminations and Pending Cases Pending and Civil Filings, Terminations Criminal case terminations numbered 13,334 in 2006, 13,334 in 2006, numbered case terminations Criminal number of The year. the prior from 2.3 percent down 5.1 down 12,399, to criminal cases decreased pending 2005. from percent

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 42 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o 42,213, up2.3percent from 41,254theprioryear. from 41,796in2005. The numberofpendingcivilcaseswas Civil caseterminations numbered 40,800, down 2.4percent Eastern and Western Washington. ofHawaii, by Idaho, thedistricts reported Oregon and Islands. Mariana Decreases wereGuam andtheNorthern California, andSouthern Nevada, Montana, Northern Arizona, Eastern, were ofAlaska, inthedistricts reported Elsewhere inthecircuit, increases innewcivilfi 5,589 casesin2005. which opened8,171newcases, up46.2percent from fi from 11,940in2005. The biggestincrease innewcivil number ofnewcivilcasesat11,383,down 4.7percent The ofCalifornia Central thelargest District reported respectively, oftheU.S. civilfi prisoner petitionsaccounted for 10.2and8.6percent, percent ofthetotal. to vacate Motions sentence and involvedgovernment Security, wasaparty Social 31.4 ofcivil fi The largest category trademark cases, 9.1percent. 11.2percent;contracts, andcopyright, patent and D r lings was reported by the Northern District ofCalifornia, District by theNorthern lings wasreported t

F i n ISTRICT a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 4 2 C OURT F lings inwhichthe lings. ILINGS

CONTINUED lings Visiting Judges up slightlyfrom 7monthsin2005. disposition for thecircuit andnationallywas7.1months, 2005. For criminalcases, themediantimefrom fi was 7.9monthsin2006compared with9.6monthsin in2005. reported The nationalmediantimefor civilcases was 8.3months, aslightimprovement over the8.4months The mediantimefrom fi 2006, upfrom 11.76monthsin2005. termination rate remained constant, was12.11monthsin would taketo clearthependingcaseloadifcurrent Case Termination whichcomputes Index, how longit Circuit’sNinth remained relatively stablein2006. The ofthe Case processing courts timesinthedistrict Case ProcessingTimes workload imbalances andothersituations.workload Circuit, helpingto intheNinth address among courts c circuit. Sharingofjudicialresourcesa is withinthecircuit, andsixwerecourts outsidethe from courts the work those, of86visitingjudges. 80were Of judgesfrom Circuit benefi oftheNinth courts 2006,district In ling to dispositionfor civilcases ommon practice ommon practice ted from ling to 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 1 4

A M M A

4 1 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 43

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 Change 2005-2006 ruptcy courts 76.6 down lings, er 15 = 3); Northern Calif. (Chapter 9 = er 15 = 3); Northern Calif. 243,164 223,414285,840 140,931 -8.1% -50.7% 13 bankruptcy, Under Chapter lers. the exceed not and debts may years ve lings totaled 248,430 nationally, 40.2 percent 40.2 percent nationally, 248,430 lings totaled Octoberective (1) Section 17, 2005. 101 of the U.S. non-business fi in full or in part, in installments, be repaid may creditors fi to three over individuals statutory for 13 is available amount. Chapter but not as sole proprietorships, operating businesses partnerships Infor non-business 2006, or corporations. 13 fi Chapter of 24.1 percent in the circuit, and 18,934 of the total, 2006. Bank in lings plummeted laws eff bankruptcy fi Caseload MeasureCaseload 2005 2006 Filings 7 Business Chapter 11 Business Chapter 12 Business Chapter 13 Business Chapter 5,508 7 Non-Business Chapter 889 11 Non-Business Chapter 57 2,180 13 Non-Business Chapter 292,802 1,023 *Total 152 725 56,035 35,015Terminations -60.4% 45 454 18,934 -18.4% -80.9% Cases **Pending 120 -55.6% -21.1% -45.9% -21.1% 335,454 78,505 -76.6% Bankruptcy Code defi nes consumer (non-business) debt as that incurred by an consumer (non-business) debt as that incurred nes Bankruptcy defi Code If the debtor or household purpose. family, individual primarily for a personal, of a business to operation or a partnership, or if debt related is a corporation of the debt is business. the nature predominates, Year Calendar ected elsewhere: refl cases not include the following gures *These fi (Chapter 9 = 1 and Section 304 = 3); Calif. 2005: Arizona (Section 304 = 1); Central (Chapter Wash. (Section = 1); Western 304 (Chapter 9 = 1); Hawaii Northern Calif. 9 = (Chapter Calif. 2006: Arizona (Chapter 15 = 1); Central Year 15 = 1) Calendar (Chapt 1 and Chapter 15 = 1); Eastern Calif. (Chapter 15 = 1) Wash. (Chapter 15 = 2); Western 1 and Chapter 15 = 2); Hawaii for 2005 revised. cases **Pending Note: Chapter 15 was added and section 304 was terminated by changes in changes terminated by added and section 304 was Note: Chapter 15 was the bankruptcy TABLE 8: Business and Non-Business Bankruptcy Cases Commenced, TABLE by Chapter of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, During the 12-Month Period Ending December 31, 2006 lings, down 70.3 percent from the record 2,078,415 cases 2,078,415 the record from 70.3 percent down lings, though le even 2005, warranted seeking warranted ILINGS F lings ect in October of that lings lers and lers lings in 2005. The circuit accounted for 12.7 percent of the 2006 national of the 2006 percent 12.7 for accounted circuit The lings in 2005. OURT lers. numbers in lings among lings mmon type C 3 4 : make to lings continued lings nationally totaled keep certain lers to 7 fi Chapter lers. 1 c lings. e S

7 are ling under Chapter

58,215, or lings numbered d d 75,090, or lings numbered n i . l a n i not have nancial situations may non- in 2006. Inlings the circuit, F

t enactment by of the ling rush of 2005 was prompted r o both business and ling among p

ANKRUPTCY e R

l lings. lings nationally and in the circuit. a came under Chapter 7, which allows 7, which allows came under Chapter non-business fi including primary property, exempt while the remaining residences, property creditors. pay is sold to Businesses fi liquidated and terminated. In the Ninth and terminated. liquidated 7 was used by in 2006, Chapter Circuit fi of non-business 75 percent Bankruptcy Filings by Chapter number of fi the largest noted, As of business fi 63.8 percent Chapter 13 was the second largest largest 13 was the second Chapter category of bankruptcy fi fi business fi 7 of the Bankruptcy under Chapter Filings the most co were Code nationally reportednationally 617,660 new fi in 2005. Bankruptcyopened courts in the Ninthreported fi 78,505 Circuit 335,454 fi from percent fi The Protection Consumer and Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention eff into Act of 2005, which went restrictive be more to actThe widely perceived was year. fi to people many prompting on debtors, their fi to is believed perception That bankruptcy protection. the to much of 2006, contributing through persisted have in fi downturn Non-business fi up the majority of new bankruptcy fi Non-business fi of the 597,965, or nearly 97 percent fi total of the total. 95.6 percent of fi non-business fi 360,890, or 58.4 nationally totaled In the circuit, of the total. percent 7 fi Chapter 74.2 percent. After record reaching B

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 44 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o the circuit, 21.2percent ofallbusinessfi 23.6 percent ofthebusinessfi of California, ofOregon, 7,585. 7,742;andtheDistrict District ofArizona, 7,793;theNorthern 8,448; theDistrict in 2006,followed by the Western of District Washington, The ofCalifornia Eastern District 9,323newfi reported percent ofthetotal. non-business Chapter 7fi numbered 16,843,94.6percent ofthetotal. Businessand fi fi bankruptcy The ofCalifornia Central 17,802new District reported Islandsto Mariana 80.6percent inArizona.in theNorthern fi decrease inbankruptcy inthecircuit asharp reported court bankruptcy Every FilingsbyDistrict Bankruptcy 45 inthecircuit, 1.3percent ofthetotal businessfi 348 nationally, 1.8percent ofthetotal businessfi debts andkeeptheirfarms. Chapter 12fi achance to reorganizefarmers facingbankruptcy their is available onlyto businessfi offi The smallestcategory in thecircuit. business Chapter 11fi individual to usefuture earningsto pay off less commonly innon-businessfi formulating aplanto repay itscreditors. Althoughused 11 allows abusinessto continue operationswhile fi Chapter ofbankruptcy 11was second largest category 13.3 percent. nationally, 14percent ofthetotal, and454inthecircuit, the total. BusinessChapter 13fi B r fth most in the nation in 2006. Its non-businessfi mostinthenation2006.Its fth lings amongbusinessfi t

F i ANKRUPTCY n a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 4 4 lings, Circuit andthe themostinNinth C lings totaled 520nationallyand120 lers, numbering4,643nationally, lings, ranging from 46.9percent lings numbered 14,230,79.9 OURT lings wasChapter 12,which lers andprovides family lings total, and725in lings numbered 2,749 lings, italsoallows an F ILINGS lings. C lings numbered creditors. Non- hapter

lings, and CONTINUED lings lings. lings seven districts. judgesassisted in During 2006,ninerecalled bankruptcy recalled judges. judgesto relieve bankruptcy theactive continue to rely courts on Circuit bankruptcy Ninth to 2009. appointmentextends Russell. His Judge Barry bench,succeededa 19-year veteran ofthebankruptcy Vincent P. Zurzolo inDecember 2006.JudgeZurzolo, also Judge California saw theelevationofChiefBankruptcy forThe Court theCentral U.S. of District Bankruptcy Hargrove. to 2011. appointmentextends His benchfor 19 years,bankruptcy succeeded JudgeJohnJ. Peter W. Bowie inJune2006.JudgeBowie, aveteran ofthe Judge California saw theelevationofChiefBankruptcy of forThe District Court theSouthern U.S. Bankruptcy California, withchambersinSanJose. of District for Court the Northern the U.S. Bankruptcy in Los Angeles;andRogerL.Efremsky, appointed to for ofCalifornia,Court theCentral District withchambers and appointed toVictoria theU.S. S.Kaufman, Bankruptcy Nevada withchambersinLas Vegas; RichardM.Neiter for appointed to Court Nakagawa, theU.S. Bankruptcy judges. four newbankruptcy The newcomers K. are Mike ofAppealsappointed Circuit Court 2006,theNinth In Appointments, Transitions down 50.7percent. 8.1 percent, whilependingcasesnumbered 140,931, Circuit, terminations theNinth totaledIn 223,414,down while pendingcasestotaled 1,331,023,down 38.1percent. 1,435,482 in2006,down 8.9percent from theprioryear, Nationally, caseterminations numbered bankruptcy Terminations andPending Cases 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 1 5

A M M A

5 1 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 45

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 thern District of of the Central District of the Central n District of lings. lings. isdiction, consolidation, or based isdiction, or based consolidation, Dispositions Of those, the year. of 423 appeals for BAP disposed The was argument Oral merits terminations. 185 appeals were on submitted and 11 appeals were held in 174 appeals, published 34 were Of the 185 merits terminations, briefs. was 27.6 percent. rate reversal The opinions. an appeal decided on the merits median time for The 238 appeals were remaining The was 11.4 months. lack of such as for grounds, on procedural terminated lack prosecution, of jur with BAP ended the period The on voluntary dismissal. 232 appeals pending. from left, Bankruptcyfrom Judge Christopher M. Klein of the Easter led, down down led, led. The The led. ANEL P PPELLATE the 2005 le appeals challenging A in up and down gone lings have 5 4 district a by court,appeal heard the timely electionles a is the appeal have to : 1 c e S

at least somewhat in 2007, lings likely will slow d d n i . l a n i F

t The Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel consists of, seated of, Bankruptcy consists The Ninth Circuit Appellate Panel California, Bankruptcy Judge Philip H. Brandt of the Western District of Washington, Bankruptcy District Judge Dennis of Washington, Montali of the Nor of the Western BankruptcyCalifornia, H. Brandt Judge Philip of the District of Idaho; Bankruptcy Pappas Judge Erithe A. Smith left, Bankruptcy standing from Judge Jim D. and, California; and Bankruptcyof California Judge Randall L. Dunn of the District of Oregon. r o p

ANKRUPTCY e R

l in 2006 of 735 appeals fi an all-time low led to a decline in fi as litigants begin to fi to as litigants begin bankruptcy amendments. law For calendar year 2006, 735 new appeals were fi 2006, 735 new appeals were calendar year For Bankruptcy appeal fi New Filings BAP handled 51 percent 764 appeals the prior year. from in heard of all bankruptcy were while 49 percent appeals, handled between historically BAP has The district courts. of all appeals in the circuit. 50 and 60 percent high in 2002 of 904 appeals a six-year from years, recent fi

All district courts within the Ninth Circuit have issued general orders providing for the automatic the automatic for All district providing courts orders issued general Ninth within the have Circuit of bankruptcy However, disposition. for (BAP) referral the Bankruptcy to appeals Panel Appellate partyif any fi bankruptcy Seven the by rule. authorized the consent to are judges according transferred position has one years, During the past four serve to on the BAP. Council Ninth Judicial Circuit load based on new fi work reduced held vacant due to been intentionally B

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 46 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o elections). The BAP numbersexcludeelections). TheBAP allsuchappeals. (bothappellantandappellee have theappealheard inthedistrictcourt numbersincludeallappealsinwhichatimelyelectionwas madeto court Table B-23,andondatafrom theBAP’s ICMSdocketing system.Thedistrict are calculated appealstotheBAP based ondatafrom AOUSCbankruptcy Offi directly from astatistical caseload tableprepared by theAdministrative are taken appealstothedistrictcourts *The numbersforbankruptcy review. resolved second-level withonlyabout19percent seeking disposed ofby theBAP, over 80.4percent were fully courts. the district Thus, ofthe423appealswhichwere decisions by theBAPand64were from decisionsby appeals were fi level appellate review. For theyear, 143second-level may befi court Appeals from adecisionofeithertheBAPordistrict Appeals totheNinthCircuit B Ending December31,2006 TABLE AppealFilingsforthe12-MonthPeriod 9:NewBankruptcy r t

et ah 81 47 12 24 735 46 6 9 19 361(49%) 13 10 12 30 38 2 4 374(51%) 121 7 59 28 2 12 6 17 82 16 272 Total 62 4 5 West. Wash. 26 East. Wash. 6 40 3 Oregon 129 21 Nevada 59 Montana Idaho 33 Hawaii 143 42 So. Calif. 3 No. Calif. East. Calif. Cent. Calif. Arizona Alaska District F i ce of the United States Courts (“AOUSCce oftheUnitedStatesCourts Table B-23”).The numbersfor ANKRUPTCY n a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 4 6 led. Of these,led. 79were Of appealsfrom led with the court ofappealsfor second-led withthecourt pelt ae Dsrc or Total Court *District Appellate Panel Bankruptcy Bankruptcy A PPELLATE P ANEL

CONTINUED Committee. Education Circuit Bankruptcy a pastchairmanoftheNinth Committee for Circuit JudicialConference, theNinth andis ontheConferencebench since 1998.Heserved Executive onthebankruptcy chambers inPortland, hasserved ofArizona. JudgeDunn,whohas oftheDistrict Marlar September, JudgeJamesM. succeeding Bankruptcy ofOregon, wasappointedof theDistrict to theBAPin L.Dunn JudgeRandall new memberin2006.Bankruptcy for appointmentsto theBAP,statutory appointed one The JudicialCouncil Circuit, which has oftheNinth BAP Judges 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 1 8

A M M A

8 1 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 47

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 its Advisory Committee. Plans were made to invite invite made to Plans were its Advisory Committee. meetings board future to of those groups representatives to such as consent discuss issues of mutual concern, to judge jurisdiction. magistrate Educational Programs in the 2006 Ninth Judicial Conference At Circuit Judges Education the Magistrate Beach, Calif., Huntington Judge M. Margaret Circuit by remarks featured program of the NinthMcKeown Court Judge Circuit of Appeals. on Codes who servesMcKeown, on the JCUS Committee and suggestions on matters of Conduct, had advice by noted Among the matters judicial ethics. to related the over was the ongoing controversy Judge McKeown conferences. sponsored of judges at privately attendance the over ce The Magistrate Judges Executive Board consists of: seated from left, Leslie E. Kobayashi of Hawaii, Hawaii, of Kobayashi E. of: consists Board left, Leslie seated from Judges Executive The Magistrate and Janice Washington, of Western chair, J. Kelley Arnold, of Eastern Washington, Imbrogno Cynthia Roberts of John D. California, left, Ralph Zarefsky of Central M. Stewart from middle row of Oregon; Manibusan James Larson of Northern Mikel H. Williams of Idaho, Joaquin V.E. Alaska, California, O’Neill J. of Eastern left, Lawrence from of Guam, and Robert back row and, J. Johnston of Nevada; “Bart” Leif California, Erickson of Montana, Anthony J. Battaglia of Southern and California of Arizona. Velasco P. Bernardo observercial at ATTERS M UDGE J 7 4 : of their courts the work to in 2006. cant contributions 1 c e S

d d n i . l a n i F

t r AGISTRATE o p

e R

l a 2006 saw the elevation of Magistrate Judge Anthony Judge Anthony the elevation of Magistrate 2006 saw as the Battaglia of the Southern DistrictJ. of California Board, Judges Executive the Magistrate new chair for Kelley Arnold of the Judge J. Magistrate succeeding Judge Battaglia assumed Washington. District of Western Ore. OctoberAshland, meeting in at the board’s the gavel Judge Battaglia serves as an offi chair, As Judges Executive the Magistrate Also during the year, the Ninth liaisons with Circuit’s established formal Board and Committee Coordinating Representative Lawyer Six new magistrate judges were sworn into offi into sworn judges were Six new magistrate Brennan Judge Edmund F. were They of the year. course C. Jeremiah Judge Districtof the Eastern of California, of the District of Montana, and Judges Jacqueline Lynch and John C. Mumm, Oswald Parada F. Chooljian, Frederick District of the Central of California. Rayburn, Jr., of the Ninth He Circuit. meetings of the Judicial Council on Criminal Rules of the also serves on the Committee States. of the United Judicial Conference New Magistrate Judges and Governance Magistrate judges presided over 747 over judges presided Magistrate conferences, criminal pretrial more before. the year from up 42.9 percent prisoner 792 more also reviewed They most of them pertainingpetitions, to Civil rights petitions were civil rights. before the year from up 25.4 percent of all 45 percent for and accounted prisoner petitions. The total number of matters disposed of matters number total The the Ninth judges in magistrate of by down was 177,419 in 2006, Circuit 2005. Decreases from 0.6 percent trials of seen in arraignments, were civil consent Class A misdemeanors, and civil without a jury, cases heard Increases settlement conferences. reported in the evidentiarywere conferences, pretrial proceedings, taking and prisoner guilty of pleas, petitions. Magistrate judges assist district judges in a range of judicial matters, including presiding over over including presiding district judges assist Magistrate judicial matters, in a range of judges and civil hearings, other criminal various civil cases, criminal and some preliminary proceedings, In the Ninth petitions. and prisoner 11 part-time full-time and 95 Circuit, judges magistrate made signifi M

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 48 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o TABLE 10: voir dire. mattersandinternational prisonertransfer Beginningin2000, civilandcriminalotherjury proceedings were added. Criminal Justice Act feeapplications; naturalization proceedings; grand returns; civilandcriminal IRSenforcement jury proce 6 Before includedseizure/inspection 2000,thiscategory warrants judgmentdebtorexams; extradition hear andorders ofentry; appointmenthearings. includesmaterialwitnesshearingsandattorney 5 Category trials, andmotionhearings. includes feeapplications, jury 4 Category summary includeswrits, hearings, mentalcompetency 3 Category andmotionhearings. 2 Before didnotinclude statusconferences. 2000,category Beginningin2000,status conferences were added. 1 Before includedcontested 2000,category motionsonly. Beginning in2000,uncontested motionswere added. r t SeilMsesis7 635.2% 11.4% -77.6% -18.2% 96 919 34 999 825 71 39.8% 11.1% 152 1,222 Other 274 SpecialMasterships 1,107 Security Social Proceedings Evidentiary 636(b)(1)(B) Motions 196 996 Pretrial Conferences Proceedings Evidentiary 636(b)(1)(B) Motions ragmns1,4 414-4.5% 1.0% 6.3% 7.7% -1.1% 1.2% -0.6% -0.1% Percent Change2005-2006 0.6% 14,174 13,746 3,664 23,546 5,448 8,219 2006 14,840 13,607 177,419 6,064 3,447 81,919 23,797 5,057 8,123 2005 178,540 6,071 Other 81,410 BailReviews/Nebbia Hearings Detention Hearings Arraignments Preliminary Examinations Appearances Initial Arrest Warrants/Summonses Search Warrants Preliminary Proceedings Total Matters Activity CvlRgt ,0 ,1 25.4% -40.0% -7.5% 1.9% 16.5% 2,515 45 430 2,600 -1.8% 5,590 2,006 465 75 11.4% -17.4% 2,552 4,798 28,996 -11.0% 3.6% Matters Miscellaneous 6,685 3,426 -6.7% Proceedings Evidentiary 27.8% 29,515 CivilRights Federal Habeas State Habeas -10.3% Prisoner Petitions 6,002 4,149 1,191 -10.0% 27,368 23 42 -34.8% 0.2% 636(b)(1)(A) Motions 1,338 26,415 2,819 Pretrial Other Conferences Conferences Settlement 2,884 Civil 18 45 Other Pleas Guilty 3,142 1,139 ReleaseHearings Supervised Probation Revocation and 20,414 3,205 636(b)(1)(A) Motions 1,746 20,377 Criminal Additional Duties Nonjury Trial Jury Trial Without Trial Civil Consent Cases Petty Off ClassAMisdemeanors Trial Cases Jurisdiction

F i n a l . i n d d

5

4 3 S e ess1,3 9253.5% 19,275 18,631 enses c 1 : 4 Matters DisposedofbyNinthCircuitMagistrateJudgesDuringthe12-MonthPeriod EndingSeptember30,2006 8 6 2 1 1 2 2801,4 -20.1% 10,248 0.3% 12,820 15,239 -1.5% 15,191 11,283 11,457 ,6 ,5 9.1% 7,058 6,468 ,8 ,6 -5.0% 16.3% 4,068 -7.4% 4,280 42.9% 4,215 4,340 3,625 2,488 4,685 1,741 edings; calendar calls; and ings, contempt proc 0 8 / eedings; eedings; 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 2 0

A M M A

0 2 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 49

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 ce of ce t 2005-2006 Percent Change Percent the through ces federal are ces non-government ed by Defender Public of the Federal ce federal ed with experienced Both types of the judiciary. employees ed by that indigents requirement ll the constitutional Fiscal Year Fiscal The biggest decreases, numerically and percentage-wise, numerically and percentage-wise, biggest decreases, The down in the districts 427 new cases, of Hawaii, were Guam, 49 prior year; 568 cases the from 24.8 percent 191 cases in FY2005; from percent 74.3 down new cases, from 3.4 percent down 3,180 new cases, California, Central from 15.4 percent down 3,293; and Montana, 586 cases, 693 cases. with the last six years varied over caseloads have Circuit reported in 2001, 2002, 2004 and 2006, and increases in 2003 and 2005. decreases the Offi created Congress fulfi to with no-cost, crimes be provided federal with charged funds public Congress legal representation. professional offi and community defender defender Services OffiDefender Division of the Administrative Courts. States the United non-profi are organizations defender Community legal service staff organizations offi while public defender employees, agencies staff staff are of organizations high a consistently practitionerscriminal law who provide of representation. level public and appeals, In criminal defense addition to court-directed to assigned are defenders prisoner and bail/pre-sentencing, and witness representations, hearings. revocation and parole probation

30, 2006). September 1, 2005 to (October 2006 year scal scal year. They They year. scal scal year. Of the new scal year. EFENDERS D lands and parks. federal enses from UBLIC 9 4 : 1 c P e S

d d n i . l a n i F

t r o p

e EDERAL ce opened in Yuma, in the extreme southwestern part in the extreme southwestern Yuma, opened in ce off involving ce R

Cases 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 OpenedClosedPending 24,780 24,634 7,669 23,539 23,247 7,944 24,543 24,215 23,157 8,287 22,979 25,588 8,460 25,795 10.5% 8,471 12.3% 0.1% l TABLE 11: Federal Defender Organizations - Cases Opened, Closed and Pending, During the 12-Month Period During the 12-Month Period Closed and Pending, Defender Organizations - Cases Opened, 11: Federal TABLE Ending September 30, 2006 a The upturn in new cases opened in Arizona derives from from derives upturn in new cases opened in Arizona The enforcement most notably increased factors, several Immigration and Customs the U.S. by and prosecution A new defender attorney. agency and U.S. Enforcement offi has borders, and California near the Mexico of the state activity as immigration prosecutions shiftsseen increased There Tucson/Nogales. from San Diego and from there the Flagstaff in cases opened by also has been an increase In Arizona, one of two border courts new In border one of two the circuit, in Arizona, 8,116, up 45.7 percent totaled cases opened in FY2006 cases the prior fi 5,570 new from District the Eastern of Also reporting were increases Western the up 4.9 percent; 2,089 new cases, California, up 5.9 percent; new cases, 1,904 Washington, District of up 761 new cases, Washington, Districtand the Eastern of 2.6 percent. But a big jump in the number of new cases opened in Arizona along with modest growth in four in four modest growth along with in Arizona cases opened of new jump in the number But a big as a whole. the circuit caseload for in in a net increase other districts resulted The FY2005. from up 12.3 percent closed 25,795 cases, was 26.3 of the national caseload Ninth share Circuit closed. both cases opened and for percent of them many in nature, criminal were 87.1 percent cases, also was A modest increase illegal immigration. involving court, other border the Southern reported the circuit’s by new cases opened totaled where District of California, the 4,031 opened in FY2005. from 4,361, up 8.2 percent offi nine districts. reported by in new cases were Decreases Ninth Circuit defenders opened 25,588 new cases in opened Ninth defenders Circuit the prior fi from FY2006, up 10.5 percent Federal public defenders and community defenders in nine of 14 judicial districts in nine and community defenders of the Ninth defenders public Federal in fi their workloads decrease saw Circuit F

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 50 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o public defender may bereappointed ifthecourt and theuseofalocalscreening committee. Afederal anationwideits initialappointmentafter recruitment and appointfederal public defenders. makes The court By statute, ofappealsselect judgesofthecircuit court Appointments more casesthan theyear before. defenderscommunity was8,471casesinFY2006,11 CircuitThe publicand pendingcaseloadofNinth Pending andClosedCases Ending September30,2006 TABLE ofRepresentations 12:Federal byDistrictDuringthe12-MonthPeriod DefenderOrganizations-Summary F Washington by adefenderorganization. andIdahoare MarianaIslandsisnotserved combined intooneorganization. Northern prisonerandwitnessrepresentations, bail/pre-sentencing, andprobationcourt-directed andparole revocation hearings. Eastern Organizations: Inadditiontohandlingcriminaldefensesandappeals, Defender publicdefendersare*Community assignedto r t of National Total Circuit Total as% National Total Circuit Total West. Wash. *East. Wash. Oregon Nevada *Montana *Idaho Hawaii Guam *So. Calif. No. Calif. East. Calif. Cent. Calif. Arizona Alaska District

F EDERAL i n a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 5 0 P UBLIC D Sept. 30,2005 Sept. Opened 7779,1 04 82636,172 8,471 98,206 25,795 -0.4% 10.5% 97,413 25,588 97,777 23,157 37 63 .%2.%23.4% 26.3% 2.6% 26.3% 23.7% EFENDERS ,9 ,0 .%194504 899 700 1,934 1,524 1,251 5.9% 1,273 -2.0% 845 -5.7% 1,904 1,361 4,134 1,186 1,548 2,019 1,145 1,798 3,324 8.2% 8,092 1,580 4.9% 1,214 -3.4% 4,361 45.7% 2,089 3,180 4,031 8,116 1,991 3,293 5,570 4 6 .%76305 252 736 174 427 49 606 2.6% 392 329 548 147 -15.4% 761 -0.6% 104 860 -9.2% -20.9% 586 320 742 -5.9% 291 516 151 693 815 322 -3.7% 568 191 287 866 298 Sept. 30,2006 Sept.

CONTINUED Opened Denvir. afour-year Hewillserve term endingin2010. followingdistrict theretirement ofhispredecessor Quin federalHe hadbeentheacting publicdefender for the which stretches from Bakersfi appointed inJunefor ofCalifornia, theEastern District appointed anewdefender. DanielBroderick was 2006,theU.S.In ofAppealsfor Circuit theNinth Court evaluationprocess.performance and mannerbaseduponabroad survey satisfactory inahighly concludes thatheorsheisperforming 2005-2006 Change Sept. 30,2006 Sept. Closed eld to theOregon border. Sept. 30,2006 Sept. Pending 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1

: 2 0

A M M A

1 2 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 51

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 enders Change 2005-2006 scal year. scal enders who qualify for identify off to ces the majority of for account to enses continue under supervision. Both districts showed fewer cases than under supervision. fewer Both districts showed however. year, the previous districts of 15 judicial Eleven in the Ninth reported Circuit The supervision. in the number of persons under increases reported numerically was the District by increase greatest 1,030 cases from up 9 percent cases, of Nevada with 1,123 District up 14.9 The of Idaho had 439 cases, in FY2005. 382 cases the prior fi from percent Drug off cases under supervision in the Ninth as well Circuit under In FY2006, 7,465 persons were as nationally. supervision violations, drug law in the Ninth for Circuit number of off the total 38.5 percent amounting to next The largest under supervision Circuit. in the category was property 5,189 persons violations with This under supervision of the total. or 26.8 percent category reported as burglary, includes data previously theft, auto forgery embezzlement, fraud, and larceny, and postal laws. counterfeiting, Cases Revoked and closed after post- cases revoked FY2006, the total For up 3.4 supervisionconviction 2,818 cases, to increased 2,726 cases in FY2005. Of 341 cases from these, percent The institutions. from courts from and 2,477 were were and closed is 13,485 cases, cases revoked total nationwide in the 12,737 cases revoked over of 5.9 percent an increase and of all cases revoked share NinthThe Circuit’s FY2005. of the national total. closed is 20.9 percent Early Terminations to has worked Committee the Criminal Law 2002, Since offi encourage of when the conditions Inearly termination. general, cers cers cers conduct cers cers establish cers ense conduct, ense ces in the Ninth Circuit are responsible for preparing pre-sentence pre-sentence preparing for responsible are the Ninth Circuit in ces in the Ninth cers Circuit scal year. Districts scal year. and criminal ense level FFICES s off = s success under supervision. The The under supervision.s success = O 1 1, 2005 to 2006 (October scal year 5 : 1 ender c e S

Ninth Circuit Federal Probation System - Persons Under Post-Conviction Supervision Under Post-Conviction as of Probation System - Persons Ninth Circuit Federal

d d n i . l a n i F

t r o p

e ROBATION offi Probation areas. in rural ces R Persons Under SupervisionPersons 2005 2006 From CourtsFrom InstitutionsFrom Total 14,492 4,752 19,244 14,922 4,467 19,389 3.0% -6.0% 0.8%

l TABLE 13: TABLE September 30, 2006 a At the close of fi At persons under post- September 30, 2006), the number of supervisionconviction in the Ninth remained Circuit the prior fi from stable relatively with 5,286 cases and the District Central of California The District with 2,988 cases had the most persons of Arizona Offenders Under Supervision Among persons under supervision in the Ninth Circuit, the courts, while 14,529 from on probation 4,467 were Another on supervised institutions. from were release of the and 21 in the custody on parole 372 persons were of Prisons. Bureau to performto variety their duties in a of settings; from one person to areas courthouses metropolitan in large offi in community the highest ideals and standards exemplify delivering nationally for recognized and are corrections the highest quality services. reported 19,389 persons under supervision, 0.8 percent up for Ninth accounted The Circuit in FY2005. 19,244 from of 114,002 persons under of the national total 17 percent supervision nationally. diversity of the Ninth Circuit calls upon probation offi of the Ninth calls upon probation diversity Circuit In supervision, of the area offi probation investigation reports on convicted offenders, and for supervising offenders placed on probation, supervising on probation, and for placed offenders reports offenders, on convicted investigation release. and conditional parole, supervised release, of the off an independent investigation guidelines and policyidentify applicable statements, defendant the calculate range, history report sentencing the resulting category, sentence. the appropriate to and identify factors relevant to supervision programs of myriad plans and make use an off facilitate As pre-sentence investigators, probation offi probation pre-sentenceAs investigators, United States probation offi probation States United P

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 52 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o average was6.7percent, down from 9.1percent in2005. of California with191casesor12.3percent. The circuit 394 casesor25.3percent, followed District by theNorthern percent ofthetotal. ofArizona The was second with District the numberofearlyterminations with425casesor27.3 Circuit. in theNinth The ofCalifornia Central District ledin During FY2006,1,558caseswere terminated earlyby judges sentencing judgeto consider earlytermination. third party, the probation offi pose aforeseeable riskto publicsafety orany individual have beenmetandtheoff supervision 3 BOP(Bureau ofPrisons) 2 Includesparole, specialparole, release, parole mandatory andmilitary 1 Includesjudgeandmagistrate judgeprobation September 30,2006 TABLE 14:NinthCircuitFederal ProbationSystem-Persons byDistrictasof UnderPost-Conviction Supervision P r t ititProbation District M 42 65 10.9% 17.5% 51 168 -2.4% 46 0.8% 5.7% -0.8% 143 449 9.0% 6.7% 19,389 14.9% 1,362 0 2.6% 1,117 19,244 1,123 460 654 439 5 1,288 1,126 786 1.7% 1,030 0 0.8% 21 613 382 1 1 2.3% 0 766 1,789 3.8% 0 1,384 27 0 372 -1.3% -3.9% 0 4 1,759 109 309 1,484 2 1,373 25 14,529 30 0 2,988 24 5,286 65 1,429 302 1,005 377 3 0 53 4,467 2 3,026 833 0 5,501 4 764 Circuit Total 10 332 NMI 484 302 69 0 33 254 0 Guam 41 629 1 294 West. Wash. 33 East. Wash 1,585 167 131 935 Oregon 3 29 153 101 Nevada 1,087 171 Montana 2,175 211 Idaho 408 4,006 Hawaii 354 So. Calif. 784 1,178 No. Calif. 95 East. Calif. Cent. Calif. Arizona Alaska

F i ROBATION n a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 5 2 rmCut Referred by Institutions From Courts O FFICES 1 cer may request the Supervised

ees Parole Release CONTINUED ender doesnot 2 BOP Custody to thefi substantial contribution andprovides outstandingservice West whothrough hisorherown initiatives, makesa is given annuallyto aprobation orpretrial offi of of theEastern District Washington. The FPPOA award September by FPPOA Regional Vice President Hare Curtis Pretrial Offi Offi of Washington the wasselected Western Regional Probation Offi Note Of cer of the Year by thenationalFederal Probation and eld ofcorrections. cers Association. The award waspresented in 3 cer Michael J.cer Michael Larsonofthe Western District TotalCases 2005 TotalCases 2006 cer in the 2005-2006 Change 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 2 1

A M M A

1 2 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 53

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 ces made ces cers of pretrial pretrial of cers Change 2005-2006 activatedcers 8,462 cases in 2006, in the Attorney States of the United ces wise. Noteworthy decreases also were reported the by also were decreases Noteworthy wise. down 1,303 new cases, Washington, District of Western 1,472 in 2005; the District from of Nevada, 11.5 percent 982 in 2005; and from 13.6 percent down 848 new cases, down 1,118 new cases, Districtthe Eastern of California, 1,219 in 2005. from 8.3 percent court District another border The of Arizona, with a heavy number of new had the largest caseload, immigration Officases opened. Pretrial Bail Interviews, Supervised Defendants number of interviewsThe offi conducted by down 1.1 percent from 8,560 in 2005. from 1.1 percent down in 2006. Interviews decreased in the circuit defendants 11,071 reports from 17.7 percent 9,111, down numbered 21,958 from reports to in 2005. Pre-bail written increased 591 21,826, while post-bail and other reports to decreased services offi Pretrial before. 640 the year from the court of cases to in 96.9 percent recommendations of 91.1 the national average to with interviews, compared of in 62.3 percent was recommended Detention percent. 2005. In from of 3.2 percent all cases in 2006, a decrease Officomparison, of the in 63.7 percent detention recommended circuit in 2005. 67.1 percent from a decrease cases, released were of 6,021 defendants During 2006, a total services pretrial in the Ninth to custody Circuit from 2005. Of from supervision, of 5.8 percent a decrease services pretrial on standard released 4,851 were these, 2005; 1,009 were supervision, from 3 percent down rst nationally rst cers utilizing cers ces within the Ninth Circuit serve two vital roles for the courts: the courts: for serve roles vital the Ninth Circuit within ces two *ReportsInterviews ActivatedCases 22,466 22,732 11,071 22,549 22,750 9,111 0.4% 0.1% -17.7% Caseload MeasureCaseload 2005 2006 *Includes prebail reports with recommendation and without recommendation, and and reports and without recommendation, *Includes prebail with recommendation reports.” reported previously column from as “other includes cases TABLE 15: Pretrial Services Courts, - Cases Activated in Ninth Circuit TABLE 2006 FFICES O ectively in 12 of 15 judicial districtsces ERVICES 3 5 : in the Ninthces 1 S c e S

d d n i . l a n i F

t r o p e RETRIAL Southern DistrictThe of California, set the declines. R

l a Substantial workload decreases were reported by several reported several by were Substantial workloaddecreases number of new cases activatedThe in the Central districts. 23.5 percent was 2,143 in 2006, down District of California It was the before. 2,800 cases opened the year from percentage- largest numerically and third decrease largest reported activating fewer new cases in 2006 than the prior new cases in 2006 than the reported activating fewer Southern But a big jump in new cases in the District year. court a border with a heavy immigration of California, other districts in two and modest increases caseload, off its case activations to saw increase based in San Diego, 3,675 activations from in 2005. 5,115, up 39.2 percent the District 867 of Oregon, Also reporting were increases 827 cases in 2005, and the from up 4.8 percent new cases, 410 from up 5.6 percent District 433 new cases, of Hawaii, before. the year Pretrial services fi in the Ninth ranked Pretrial Circuit services offi Pretrial The primaryThe of pretrial mission services assist the courts is to in of unnecessary the rate reducing same while at the detentions, ensuring the time reasonably community of the and the safety at future of defendants appearance court Offi dates. eff to continued Circuit mental health and residential abuse, contracted substance use of both and the enhanced programs, treatment and state-of-the-artconventional technology. activationsin case activations 2006. Case totaled for the prior from up 0.1 percent the calendar year, 22,750 for 94,978, New case activations totaled nationwide year. Ninth The Circuit before. the year from 2.6 percent down up of the 2006 national total, 24 percent for accounted 2005. slightly from United States pretrial services pretrial States United offi these goals in 2006 by achieve working maintain very diligently to and re- nonappearance of levels low by was accomplished This defendants. of released arrests offi and experienced trained professionally P of bail reports important makingthe provision contain that and for detention information services pretrial to released supervision. of defendants monitoring and the decisions, release of eligibility the determination supervision and services for pretrial provides of In addition, each district. in programs diversion

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 54 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o percent. In 2006, the 15 district courts of the Ninth Circuit oftheNinth courts percent. 2006,the15district In plummeted along withthenationalrate to lessthan1 low. 2006, the rate In ofnonappearance inthecircuit defendants continued to besignifiof supervised bail revocations dueto nonappearance and/orre-arrest for ways to detentions, reduce therate unnecessary of districts. offi While pretrial service detention continues to have inmany apositive impact The nationalinitiative thatbeganin2000to helpreduce RatesRemain Low Nonappearance andRe-arrest pretrial diversion caseloads, adecrease of12percent. or circuit, adecrease of16.7percent; and161were on basisfrom anotherdistrict onacourtesy supervised as“otherreported reports.” with recommendation**Includes prebail andwithoutrecommendation, reports andincludescases from column previously inothercases.which defendantswere interviewed was*Includes cases refused, inwhichinterview includesdefendantsnotavailable forinterview, andtransfer-received cases in TABLE 16:PretrialWorkload 2006 Chart, P r t M 852 22 -45.2% -35.9% 23 0.6% 93 4.8% 42 24.0% -3.6% 0.1% -11.5% -2.6% -13.6% -21.2% 145 -8.7% 867 23.3% 22,750 5.6% 0 1,303 453 94,978 848 290 1 11.4% 496 22,732 23 97,490 1,472 433 827 25.1% 470 -9.9% 982 88 39.2% 591 368 5,191 43.7% 543 5 -6.5% 1 -8.3% 0 110 410 87,398 21,958 906 2 5,115 -23.5% 13 14.3% 0 1,283 -1.1% 31,224 13,639 239 3 865 1,118 200 18 1 846 of National 2,143 3,675 1,005 63,754 795 286 80 9,111 Circuit % 8,462 269 478 549 1,219 National Total 432 406 214 358 Circuit Total 51 2,800 2 508 219 NMI 8,560 184 318 44 87 Guam 541 5,063 442 1 West. Wash. 6 1,072 277 288 13 East. Wash 2,705 473 Oregon 188 346 2,133 Nevada 8,421 550 2,410 Montana 627 433 103 Idaho 6,836 Hawaii 568 So. Calif. 1,516 1,626 97 No. Calif. East. Calif. Cent. Calif. Arizona Alaska ititInterviewed District

F i RETRIAL n a l . i n d d

S e c 1 : 5 4 S ERVICES eedn otc Written Reports Defendant Contact O ces continuously look Itriwd**Prebail Interviewed FFICES *Not

CONTINUED cantly Postbail & Other violations (3,421). offi conditions, possessionofcontraband, failure to to report (positive urinescreens, monitoring violationofelectronic and 167were for failure to appear. Technical violations were for misdemeanor rearrest, 265were for “other,” include 193violationswere for felony rearrest, 142 to thecourt. these caseshadviolationsreported They the16,574casesinrelease statusin2006,2,852of Of Violations from supervision. revoked thebailofonly171defendants whoabsconded cer, etc.) accounted for theremainder ofthereported Total Cases Activated Activated 2005 Total Cases Activated Activated 2006 2005-2006 Change 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 2 2

A M M A

2 2 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 55

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 Montana Eastern Washington Idaho Arizona Nevada Oregon Alaska Southern California Eastern California Western Washington Northern California Central California ASELOADS 5 5 : Guam 1 c C e S

d d n i . l a Hawaii n

i F

t r o

ISTRICT p N. Mariana Islands e R

l

a D

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 56 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o D r t

F i n ISTRICT a l . i n d d

**Includes one authorized temporary judgeship. *Total pendingcases revised for 2005. TABLE 18:DistrictofArizona

S TABLE 17:DistrictofAlaska *Total pendingcases revised for2005. Pnig3,5 044-64 2,915 1,113 3,635 483 0 569 710 12 -46.4% 7 13 -80.6% Part-time -20.1% 20,404 Full time -22.6% 7,793 Magistrate 38,056 -18.5% 25,445 Bankruptcy 17.7% 40,214 **District 6,283 31,840 Authorized Judgeships 7,396 8,118 9,231 *Pending 9,071 Terminations 7,841 Filings Court Bankruptcy *Pending Terminations Filings Court District aeodMaue20 2006 2005 Caseload Measure e Pnig216111-59 581 311 804 173 175 175 4 -45.9% 2 3 -72.9% 2 5.9% Part-time -0.2% 1,161 Full time 622 1.0% Magistrate 2,146 -5.1% 1,607 Bankruptcy 2,297 518 District 1,518 525 Authorized Judgeships 526 519 *Pending 520 Terminations 554 Filings Court Bankruptcy *Pending Terminations Filings Court District Caseload Measure c 1 : 5 6 C ASELOADS 052006 2005

Flagstaff Authorized places ofholdingcourt: Anchorage, Fairbanks, Nome Juneau, Ketchikan, Authorized places ofholdingcourt: , Phoenix,Prescott, Tucson, Yuma 2005-2006 2005-2006 Change Change Per JudgeshipUnweighted Per JudgeshipUnweighted Alaska Arizona 2006 2006 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 2 6

A M M A

7 2 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 57

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 n r ste 2006 2006 Ea l Per Judgeship Unweighted Judgeship Per Per Judgeship Unweighted Per ra Cent Change Change 2005-2006 2005-2006 eld, Fresno, Redding, Sacramento, South Lake Tahoe, Tahoe, South Lake Sacramento, Redding, Fresno, eld, Authorized places of holding court: places Authorized Santa Ana Riverside, Angeles, Los Yosemite Authorized places of holding court: places Authorized Bakersfi 7 5 : 1 c e S

d d n i . l a n i F Caseload MeasureCaseload 2005 2006 Authorized Judgeships Authorized **District ***Bankruptcy Magistrate time Full Part-time 24 28 23 1 District Court FilingsTerminations *PendingBankruptcy Court Filings 14,717Terminations 13,282 12,791 *Pending 13,032 12,470 12,711 51,043 -13.1% 84,304 -6.1% 60,618 64,072 17,802 -2.5% 21,256 18.8% -78.9% 457 -66.8% 445 454 2,526 742 886

t Caseload MeasureCaseload 2005 2006 Authorized Judgeships Authorized District **Bankruptcy Magistrate time Full Part-time 7 6 10 0 District Court FilingsTerminations *PendingBankruptcy Court Filings 4,836Terminations 5,181 *Pending 4,897 6,780 5,707 21,619 7,590 37,402 1.3% 31,273 10.2% 35,372 9,323 11.9% 13,422 44.7% -75.1% -62.1% 816 951 1,265 4,468 1,332 1,917 *Total pending cases revised for 2005. revised pending cases *Total judgeship. temporary **Includes one authorized judgeships. temporary authorized ***Includes three r TABLE 19: Central District of California 19: Central TABLE *Total pending cases revised for 2005. revised cases pending *Total judgeship. temporary **Includes one authorized TABLE 20: Eastern of California District TABLE o p e R

l a

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 58 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o D r t

F i n ISTRICT a l . i n d d

*Total pendingcases revised for 2005. *Total pendingcases revised for2005. S TABLE DistrictofCalifornia 22:Southern DistrictofCalifornia TABLE 21:Northern e Pnig2,8 702-62 1,891 860 1,934 623 627 1 488 10 -36.2% 14 9 -73.7% Part-time -29.3% 17,022 Full time 28.9% 7,742 Magistrate 26,682 39.9% Bankruptcy 17,402 1.3% 29,383 District 8,719 24,627 Authorized Judgeships 8,784 6,763 6,828 *Pending 6,281 Terminations 6,740 Filings Court Bankruptcy *Pending Terminations Filings Court District aeodMaue20 2006 2005 Caseload Measure Pnig1,2 ,9 4.%1,374 1,085 2,391 299 444 0 418 10 -48.7% 13 4 -72.3% -22.3% Part-time 5,496 9.5% Full time 4,338 Magistrate 10,721 15.5% 9,563 Bankruptcy 5.6% 15,679 District 3,884 12,303 Authorized Judgeships 5,777 3,547 5,440 *Pending 5,000 Terminations 5,150 Filings Court Bankruptcy *Pending Terminations Filings Court District aeodMaue20 2006 2005 Caseload Measure c 1 : 5 8 C ASELOADS El Centro, SanDiego Authorized places ofholdingcourt: Eureka, Oakland, Salinas,Eureka, Oakland, SanFrancisco, SanJose, SantaRosa Authorized places ofholdingcourt: 2005-2006 2005-2006 Change Change N o r the r S n outhern Per JudgeshipUnweighted Per JudgeshipUnweighted 2006 2006 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 2 8

A M M A

8 2 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 59

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 2006 2006 m awaii H Gua Per Judgeship Unweighted Per Per Judgeship Unweighted Judgeship Per Change Change 2005-2006 2005-2006 Authorized place of holding court: place Authorized Honolulu Authorized place of holding court: place Authorized Hagatna 9 5 : 1 c e S

d d n i . l a n i F Caseload MeasureCaseload 2005 2006 Authorized Judgeships Authorized **District Bankruptcy Magistrate time Full Part-time 1 4 3 1 District Court FilingsTerminations *PendingBankruptcy Court Filings 1,360Terminations 1,258 *Pending 1,146 1,299 1,041 3,495 1,194 4,489 -15.7% -17.2% 2,809 3,288 965 -8.1% 1,444 -19.6% -78.5% 287 -56.1% 260 299 2,809 965 1,444

Caseload MeasureCaseload 2005 2006 Authorized Judgeships Authorized District Bankruptcy Magistrate time Full Part-time 0 1 1 0 District Court FilingsTerminations *PendingBankruptcy Court Filings 200Terminations 159 Pending 108 115 168 271 161 385 -42.5% 327 251 5.7% 114 49.1% 190 -7.4% -70.4% 115 -41.9% 168 161 271 385 327 t r TABLE 24: District of Hawaii TABLE *Total pending cases revised for 2005. revised cases pending *Total judgeship. temporary **Includes one authorized *Total pending cases revised for 2005. revised pending cases *Total bankruptcyNote: The district judge also handles all cases. TABLE 23: District of Guam 23: District TABLE o p e R

l a

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 60 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o D r t

F i n ISTRICT a l . i n d d

S *Total pendingcases revised for 2005. TABLE 26:DistrictofMontana *Total pendingcases revised for2005. TABLE 25:DistrictofIdaho e Pnig514368-97 3,628 1,845 3,381 402 341 1 379 -29.7% 3 3 1 -68.7% -15.7% Part-time 3,628 Full time -8.7% 1,845 Magistrate 5,164 3,381 -9.6% Bankruptcy 5.5% 5,899 District 1,205 4,011 Authorized Judgeships 1,022 1,320 1,137 *Pending 1,131 Terminations 1,078 Filings Court Bankruptcy *Pending Terminations Filings Court District aeodMaue20 2006 2005 2,913 Caseload Measure 1,466 3,905 423 380 405 0 2 -45.6% 2 2 -75.5% -15.1% Part-time -5.5% 5,826 Full time -4.9% 2,931 Magistrate 10,704 -3.3% 7,809 Bankruptcy 11,967 845 District 9,202 760 Authorized Judgeships 809 894 *Pending 799 Terminations 837 Filings Court Bankruptcy 2006 *Pending Terminations 2005 Filings Court District Caseload Measure c 1 : 6 0 C ASELOADS Boise, Coeur d’Alene, Moscow, Pocatello Authorized places ofholdingcourt: Billings, Butte, Great Falls, Helena,Missoula Authorized places ofholdingcourt: 2005-2006 2005-2006 Change Change Per JudgeshipUnweighted Per JudgeshipUnweighted Montana Idaho 2006 2006 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 2 9

A M M A

9 2 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 61

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 2006 2006 Nevada an ip Per Judgeship Unweighted Per Per Judgeship Unweighted Judgeship Per Sa Change Change 2005-2006 2005-2006 Authorized places of holding court: places Authorized Reno Lovelock, Vegas, Las Ely, Elko, City, Carson Authorized place of holding court: place Authorized Saipan 1 6 : 1 c e S

d d n i . l a n i F

Caseload MeasureCaseload 2005 2006 Caseload MeasureCaseload 2005 2006 Authorized Judgeships Authorized District **Bankruptcy Magistrate time Full Part-time 4 7 6 0 District Court FilingsTerminations *PendingBankruptcy Court Filings 2,870Terminations 2,895 *Pending 2,588 3,210 2,840 19,971 3,462 23,786 -9.8% 16,226 -1.9% 27,137 5,517 7.9% 16,428 -18.8% -76.8% -39.5% 370 406 495 4,057 1,379 4,107 Authorized Judgeships Authorized District Bankruptcy Magistrate time Full Part-time 0 1 0 0 District Court FilingsTerminations *PendingBankruptcy Court FilingsTerminations 70 76 *Pending 85 59 68 12 32 94 -15.7% 48 38 -10.5% 17 10.6% 27 216.7% -46.9% 59 -43.8% 68 94 12 32 49 t r *Total pending cases revised for 2005. revised pending cases *Total judgeship. temporary **Includes one authorized TABLE 27: District of Nevada 27: District TABLE *Total pending cases revised for 2005. revised cases pending *Total Note: The district judge also handles all bankruptcy cases. TABLE 28: District of NorthernTABLE Mariana Islands o p e R

l a

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 2 0 0 6

A n 62 n u

a Annual Report 2006 l

R e p o D r t

F i n ISTRICT a l . i n d d

*Total pendingcases revised for 2005. TABLE DistrictofWashington 30:Eastern *Total pendingcases revised for2005. S TABLE 29:DistrictofOregon e Pnig976590-90 2,980 1,732 3,635 208 0 254 -39.0% 2 278 4 2 -70.1% -28.7% Part-time 5,960 -10.2% Full time 3,463 Magistrate 9,766 -16.9% 7,269 Bankruptcy 833 -18.0% 11,577 District 10,195 Authorized Judgeships 1,016 928 1,111 *Pending 1,223 Terminations 1,355 Filings Court Bankruptcy *Pending Terminations Filings Court District aeodMaue20 2006 2005 Caseload Measure Pnig2,2 432-42 2,860 1,517 3,781 524 517 1 529 6 -44.2% 6 5 -76.8% Part-time -21.2% 14,302 Full time -2.2% 7,585 Magistrate 25,621 -4.6% Bankruptcy 18,904 -1.7% 32,687 District 3,141 23,993 Authorized Judgeships 3,104 3,212 3,175 *Pending 3,255 Terminations 3,230 Filings Court Bankruptcy *Pending Terminations Filings Court District aeodMaue20 2006 2005 Caseload Measure c 1 : 6 2 C ASELOADS Richland, Spokane, Richland, Spokane, Walla Walla, Yakima Authorized places ofholdingcourt: Coquille, Eugene, Falls, Klamath Medford, Pendleton, Portland Authorized places ofholdingcourt: 2005-2006 2005-2006 Change Change Per JudgeshipUnweighted Per JudgeshipUnweighted Oregon 2006 2006 Eastern 0 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 0 7

8 : 5 1 : 3 0

A M M A

1 3 : 1 5 The Work of the Courts : 8 63

7 0 0 2 / 0 2 / 8 0 2006 Per Judgeship Unweighted Judgeship Per c Western Tacoma f holding court Change 2005-2006 Authorized places of holding court: places Authorized Tacoma Bellingham, Seattle, 3 6 : 1 c e S

d d n i . l a n i F

Caseload MeasureCaseload 2005 2006 Authorized Judgeships Authorized District Bankruptcy Magistrate time Full Part-time 5 7 5 2 District Court FilingsTerminations *PendingBankruptcy Court Filings 4,605Terminations 4,552 *Pending 4,281 4,500 3,753 29,064 3,972 35,353 -7.0% 20,819 -17.6% 26,736 8,448 -11.7% 14,365 -28.4% -76.1% -46.3% 612 536 567 4,164 1,690 2,873 t r *Total pending cases revised for 2005. revised pending cases *Total TABLE 31: Western District of Washington District of 31: Western TABLE o p e R

l a

u n

n

A

6 0

0 2 Offi ce of the Circuit Executive P.O. Box 193939, San Francisco, CA 94119-3939 Ph: (415) 355-8800, Fax: (415) 355-8901 http://www.ce9.uscourts.gov

2006 Annual Report Cover.indd 2 08/20/2007 8:54:53 AM