Active Rules Tracker
Status of proposed federal rule amendments that may impact trial lawyers and their clients.
Active Rules Tracker
Last updated December 19, 2024
Below is a summary of proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Appellate Procedure, and Evidence that may impact trial lawyers and their clients litigating claims in federal court and state courts that mirror the federal rules. AAJ continually monitors new rule suggestions and Advisory Committee activities, including meeting with rules subcommittees, submitting informal and formal comments, and educating the plaintiff bar to provide meaningful feedback and guidance related to proposed rule amendments.
NOTE: Proposed amendments in RED could be finalized in April 2025 and approved for formal public comment beginning August 2025.
|
Rule (Topic) |
Purpose of Amendment |
Committee |
Stage |
|
FRCP 16.1 |
New MDL meet and confer rule for parties. Requires parties provide a report to the transferee judge, including the recommendations for the appointment of leadership. The parties and court are instructed to consider several prompts. Members handling MDLs should thoroughly review the approved rule and accompanying committee note. |
Civil |
Scheduled to become effective 12/1/25 |
|
FRCP 26(f)(3)(D) & 16(b)(3)(B) |
Requires parties and the court to address issues of privilege. The final amendment avoids weighing in on issues of cost or over-designation. The defense bar’s push for mandatory categorical logging was rejected by the Advisory Committee. |
Civil |
Scheduled to become effective 12/1/25 |
|
FRAP 29 |
Would require expanded disclosure of amici’s financial relationships with parties and non-parties; eliminate the party-consent option for filing amicus briefs and impose new content restrictions. |
Appellate |
Active Formal Comment Pd. |
|
FRE 801(d)(1)(A) |
Would provide limited exemption from the hearsay rule for prior inconsistent statements of a testifying witness. |
Evidence |
Active Formal Comment Pd. (ends 2/17/25) |
|
FRCP 41(a) |
Would clarify a circuit split and permit dismissal of some but not all claims in an action. Some circuits have been dismissing all claims. |
Civil |
Approved for
|
|
FRCP 81(c) |
Would preserve the rights of parties who demanded a jury trial before removal and clarify that FRCP 38 applies in removed cases where no prior jury demand was made. |
Civil |
Approved for |
|
FRCP 7.1 |
Would expand the disclosure requirements for “grandparent” corporations to help courts identify party ownership. AAJ expects pushback from the defense bar. |
Civil |
Informal Rulemaking
|
|
FRCP 43 & 45 |
Would amend Rules 43(a) and 45(c) to permit live remote testimony at trial if in-person testimony is not possible. |
Civil |
Informal Rulemaking
|
|
FRCP 45(b)(1) |
Would make it easier to serve a subpoena, particularly in gated communities or other locations where physical barriers allow witnesses to avoid service. |
Civil |
Informal Rulemaking
|
|
FRCP 55(a) & (b) |
Would change from mandatory to discretionary the duty of clerks to enter a default or a default judgment |
Civil |
Informal Rulemaking |
|
Special Masters |
Substitute new term for “Special Master” or “Court-Appointed Master,” such as “Court-Appointed Neutral” |
Civil |
Informal Rulemaking
|
|
Artificial Intelligence |
Change FRE 901 to address fabricated or altered evidence created by AI (“deepfakes”) and/or create a new FRE 707 to apply FRE 702 reliability standards to machine-generated output. The Advisory Committee appears more interested in pursuing FRE 707. |
Evidence |
Informal Rulemaking
|
|
Cross-Border Discovery |
Require consideration of international law and proportionality in cross-border discovery requests.
|
Civil |
Informal Rulemaking
|
|
TPLF Disclosure |
Mandatory disclosure of third-party litigation funding agreements/arrangements in discovery.
|
Civil |
Informal Rulemaking
|
Please contact Sue Steinman (susan.steinman@justice.org)
or Kaiya Lyons (kaiya.lyons@justice.org) with any questions.
