Bindinglaw

US · rules

Fed. Cir. IOP 8

PANEL CONFERENCE – AUTHORING ASSIGNMENT

activein force · 2008-11-14 – presentact-effective-date

1. After a case has been argued, the merits panel will hold at least one conference and

will at that conference exchange tentative views and votes. The judges announce a

“straw” vote, in reverse order of seniority, on the decision in each case and on whether to

employ a precedential opinion, a nonprecedential opinion, or a judgment of affirmance

without opinion under Rule 36.

2. The presiding judge assigns the authoring responsibility for each case at the end of

each day’s sitting or at the end of a session. If the panel is divided, the authoring role is

assigned to a member of the majority. If the presiding judge dissents, assignment will be

made by the senior active member of the majority.

3. Panel members desiring to change authoring assignments shall refer the matter to

the presiding judge for decision. The presiding judge will notify the chief judge of any

change.

4. A merits panel may follow these procedures for cases submitted on the briefs.

Alternatively, the panel may conclude that the case is appropriate for a Rule 36 judgment

or the presiding judge may preassign the authoring responsibility to a panel member

before the panel conference. Under the alternative procedure, a Rule 36 judgment or an

opinion may be voted on before the panel conference and may be ready to be issued

promptly following the panel conference.

History

Date: November 14, 2008

Provenance

Source
uscourts.gov
Retrieved
2026-09-18
Edition
2026-09-18
Content hash
be21923d0f49e6fe21caa70209ddd023e8f4eac60ee3d77d66eded3872f8d8b8
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.