3d Cir. I.O.P. 5.5

5.5.1 By Author. The authoring judge prepares a draft opinion in accordance

with the decision of the panel at conference, but the author may express

any different views reached after subsequent study of the case. The

opinion will set forth the reasons supporting the court’s decision.

5.5.2 Circulation Within Panel. After the draft opinion has been prepared,

the authoring judge circulates it to the other two members of the panel

with a request for approval or suggestions they may desire to make with

respect to the draft opinion. Answering this request is given the highest

priority by the other two judges, who shall communicate in writing their

approval or disapproval within 8 calendar days of receipt of the opinion.

This time is extended to 10 days during the month of August. Absent a

request for additional time, failure to respond within that time period shall

be deemed an approval of the opinion as drafted. Because it is the opinion

of the court, other members of the panel are free to make any suggestions

relating to the modification of, addition to, or subt raction from the

proposed text. Where a textual revision or addition is suggested, the

suggesting judge submits his or her modification in specific language

capable of being inserted into the opinion. When one of the other two

judges approves, it becomes the proposed opinion of the court. Should

the other panel members disagree with the author’s draft, the opinion is

reassigned by either the presiding judge or the ranking judge who is a

member of the panel's majority.

5.5.3 Time Schedule for Panel Drafting and Circulating Opinions;

Reassignments.

(a) 60-day period for draft opinion writing. It is the aspirational goal of

the court that, except in complex cases, the authoring judge transmit

to the panel a draft opinion within 60 days af ter assignment or after

close of any supplemental briefing or other factors suspending the

drafting process.

(b) 45-day period to file concurring or dissenting opinion. If, after a

second panel member approves the draft opinion, the third panel

member desires to separately concur or dissent, the judge not joining

in the opinion notifies the author promptly and transmits his or her

separate opinion to the panel within 45 days after the second judge's

approval is received. Panel opinions are not considered to be

completed until each member has an opportunity to revise his or her

opinion in response to those of other panel members.

5.5.4 To Non-panel Active Judges.

Drafts of unanimous not precedential opinions do not circulate to non-panel judges. Drafts of not precedential opinions that contain a dissent

circulate to non- panel judges. Drafts of not precedential opinions that

contain a concurrence circulate to non- panel judges if a member of the

panel requests that the opinion be circulated to all judges. Drafts of

precedential opinions and not precedential opinions that are not

unanimous are circulated to all active judges of the court after the draft

opinion has been approved by all three panel members, concurring or

Table of Contents

dissenting opinions have been transmitted, or all members of the panel

have had the time set forth in I.O.P. 5.5.3 to write separate opinions.

Absent a request for additional time, if the third judge has not timely

responded, the draft opinion is circulated to the active judges of the court

with the notation added to the opinion that the third judge has not joined

in the opinion. Non- panel active judges must notify the authoring judge

within 8 calendar days if they desire en banc consideration. This time is

extended to 10 days during the month of August. The circulation to non-panel active judges contains a request for notification if there is a desire

for en banc consideration. Although senior judges do not have a vote en

banc, senior judges may choose to receive circulating opinions.

5.5.5 En banc Cases.

The time schedule set forth in I.O.P. 5.5.2 and 5.5.3 is also followed in en

banc cases, except that judges will give preparation of en banc opinions

priority over preparation of panel opinions.