Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Appellate, (2026)

Court rules

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

PRELIMINARY DRAFT

Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Appellate,

Bankruptcy, Civil, and Criminal Procedure, and the Federal

Rules of Evidence

Request for Comments on Amendments to:

Appellate Rule

Bankruptcy Rules

2003, 5005, 8011, 9006, 9036, and 9037

Civil Rules

5, 5.2, 6, and 55

Criminal Rules

11, 32, 45, 49, and 49.1

Evidence Rules

104 and 902

Written Comments Due By

February 15, 2027

Prepared by the

Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure

Judicial Conference of the United States

August 2026

COMMITTEE ON RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

OF THE

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20544

JAMES C. DEVER III

CHAIR

CHAIRS OF ADVISORY COMMITTEES

ALLISON H. EID

APPELLATE RULES

CAROLYN A. DUBAY

SECRETARY

REBECCA B. CONNELLY

BANKRUPTCY RULES

SARAH S. VANCE

CIVIL RULES

MICHAEL W. MOSMAN

CRIMINAL RULES

JESSE M. FURMAN

EVIDENCE RULES

MEMORANDUM

TO:

The Bench, Bar, and Public

FROM:

Honorable James C. Dever III, Chair

Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure

DATE:

August 14, 2026

RE:

Request for Comments on Proposed Amendments to Federal Rules and Forms

____________________________________________________________________________

The Advisory Committees of the Judicial Conference Committee on Rules of Practice and

Procedure have published proposed amendments to the federal rules of practice and procedure and

are seeking public feedback. The proposed amendments to Appellate Rule 25, Bankruptcy Rules

5005, 8011, 9006, 9036, Civil Rules 5 and 6, and Criminal Rules 45 and 49 relate to the ability of

self-represented litigants to use a federal court’s electronic filing system to file and serve

documents. The proposed amendments to Bankruptcy Rule 9037, Civil Rule 5.2, and Criminal

Rule 49.1 relate to enhanced protection of taxpayer identification numbers and minors’ names in

public court filings. Other proposed amendments include: Bankruptcy Rule 2003 (relating to

meetings of creditors); Civil Rule 55 (relating to the clerk’s entry of default); Criminal Rules 11

and 32 (relating to pleas and sentencing); Evidence Rule 104 (relating to deciding preliminary

issues of fact); and Evidence Rule 902(1) (relating to self-authentication of public records of

federally recognized Indian tribes). The text of the proposed rule amendments and supporting

materials are posted on the Judiciary’s website at: https://www.uscourts.gov/formsrules/proposed-amendments-published-public-comment .

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 2 of 209

Memorandum to the Bench, Bar, and Public

Page 2

Opportunity to Submit Written Comments

Individuals who wish to submit written comments regarding one or more of the proposed

amendments must file their comments no later than February 15, 2027 through the Federal

eRulemaking Portal, https://www.regulations.gov/. Written comments must clearly identify the

proposed amendment or amendments that are the subject of the comments. Please note that all

written comments on proposed rule amendments are part of the official record and will be made

publicly available.

Opportunity to Testify at Public Hearings

Individuals who wish to present oral testimony regarding one or more of the proposed rule

amendments must submit a request to testify to the Administrative Office of the United States

Courts, Rules Committee Staff, by email to RulesCommittee_Secretary@ao.uscourts.gov.

Requests to testify must be received no later than Tuesday, December 8, 2026, regardless of

the hearing date.

If requests to testify are received, the Advisory Committees will conduct virtual public

hearings on the proposed rule amendments on the following dates:



Appellate Rules: January 25, 2027; additional day on February 1, 2027, if needed.

Bankruptcy Rules: January 8, 2027; additional day on February 9, 2027, if needed.

Civil Rules: January 13, 2027; additional day on January 26, 2027, if needed.

Criminal Rules: January 20, 2027; additional day on January 27, 2027, if needed.

Evidence Rules: January 11, 2027; additional day on January 28, 2027, if needed.

Witnesses who request to testify by the deadline will receive a confirmation email with

instructions on participating in the public hearing. Witnesses are strongly encouraged to submit a

written summary of their proposed testimony by the deadline provided in the confirmation email

(generally two weeks prior to the earliest of the two scheduled hearing dates for the relevant

Advisory Committee). Providing such a summary alerts the Advisory Committee to the points that

will be made and permits committee members to consider whether they have questions before the

hearing. It also ensures that all the points the witness wants to make are in the record.

If no requests to testify as to a proposed amendment are received by the deadline, the

scheduled hearing is subject to cancellation. In such case, the Advisory Committees will conduct

their deliberations based upon the written comments.

Procedure After the Close of the Comment Period

After any public hearings are conducted and the public comment period closes on February

15, 2027, the written comments and oral testimony will be carefully considered by the relevant

Advisory Committee. During this review, the Advisory Committee may make revisions to the

published version of the proposed amendment to address the written comments, oral testimony, or

other concerns raised by committee members during this review. At the conclusion of this review,

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 3 of 209

Memorandum to the Bench, Bar, and Public

Page 3

the Advisory Committee will either withdraw the proposed rule amendment or approve it, either

as published or with revisions to the rule text or committee note.

Under the Rules Enabling Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2072-2077, upon approval of the proposed

rule amendments by the relevant Advisory Committees, the next step is consideration by the

Judicial Conference Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure (the Standing Committee).

The Standing Committee may approve the proposed amendment, reject it, or approve it with

revisions to the rule text or committee note. If approved by the Standing Committee, the rule

amendments are then approved by the Judicial Conference, transmitted to the United States

Supreme Court for consideration and adoption, and if adopted by the Court, transmitted to

Congress by May 1, 2028. Absent congressional action, the final rule amendments will take effect

on December 1, 2028.

If you have questions about the rulemaking process or pending rule amendments, please

contact the Rules Committee Staff at 202-502-1820 or visit https://www.uscourts.gov/forms-rules.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 4 of 209

TABLE OF CONTENTS

OVERVIEW: Proposals Relating to Electronic Filing

and Service by Self-Represented Litigants..........................8

Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing & Service (May 2026) ..........9

OVERVIEW: Proposals Relating to Privacy Rules in Public

Court Filings ........................................................................32

Report on the Privacy Rule Amendments (May 2026) ..............................33

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE .............................35

Excerpt from Report of the Advisory Committee

on Appellate Rules (May 2026) .................................................................36

Rule 25.

Filing and Service .................................................................38

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE .........................57

Excerpt from Report of the Advisory Committee

on Bankruptcy Rules (May 2026) ..............................................................58

Rule 2003. Meeting of Creditors or Equity Security Holders .................61

Rule 5005. Filing Papers and Sending Copies to the

United States Trustee ............................................................64

Rule 8011. Filing and Service; Signature ................................................73

Rule 9006. Computing and Extending Time; Motions ...........................91

Rule 9036. Electronic Notice and Service ...............................................92

Rule 9037. Protecting Privacy for Filings .............................................101

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 5 of 209

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE .......................................108

Excerpt from the Report of the Advisory Committee

on Civil Rules (May 2026) .......................................................................109

Excerpt from the Report of the Advisory Committee

on Civil Rules (December 2025) ..............................................................111

Rule 5.

Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers ..................114

Rule 5.2.

Privacy Protection for Filings Made with the Court ...........130

Rule 6.

Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion

Papers ..................................................................................137

Rule 55.

Default; Default Judgment ..................................................138

FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ..............................142

Excerpt from the Report of the Advisory Committee

on Criminal Rules (May 2026).................................................................143

Rule 11.

Pleas ....................................................................................154

Rule 32.

Sentencing and Judgment ...................................................156

Rule 45.

Computing and Extending Time .........................................157

Rule 49.

Serving and Filing Papers ...................................................158

Rule 49.1.

Privacy Protection For Filings Made with the Court ..........175

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE ........................................................182

Excerpt from the Report of the Advisory Committee

on Evidence Rules (May 2026) ................................................................183

Rule 902.

Evidence That Is Self-Authenticating .................................187

Rule 104.

Preliminary Questions.........................................................189

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 6 of 209

TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPENDIX .................................................................................................193

Procedures for Committees on Rules of Practice

and Procedure ..........................................................................................194

List of Committee Members ...................................................................199

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 7 of 209

OVERVIEW:

Proposals Relating to Electronic Filing and Service by

Self-Represented Litigants

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 8 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

MEMORANDUM

DATE:

May 11, 2026

TO:

Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure

FROM:

Catherine T. Struve

RE:

Project on self-represented litigants’ filing and service

I write to provide an overview of the package of proposed amendments relating to service

and electronic filing by self-represented litigants. This package includes proposed amendments

to Appellate Rule 25, Bankruptcy Rules 5005, 8011, 9006, and 9036, Civil Rules 5 and 6, and

Criminal Rules 45 and 49. I enclose a chart showing how components of the package compare

across the rule sets. I also enclose the proposed amendments.

As the Committee knows, this project focuses on two broad topics: (1) increases to

electronic access to court by self-represented litigants (whether via the court’s electronic-filing

system or alternative means) and (2) service (of papers subsequent to the complaint) by selfrepresented litigants on those who will receive an electronic notice of filing (“notice of case

activity”) through the court’s electronic-filing system or through a court-based electronicnoticing program.

As to service, the proposed amendments would eliminate the requirement of separate

(paper) service (of documents after the complaint) on a litigant who receives a notice of case

activity through the court’s electronic-filing system or a court-based electronic-noticing program.

As to filing, the proposed amendments would: (1) presumptively permit self-represented litigants

to file electronically (unless a court order or local rule bars them from doing so) and (2) provide

that a local rule or general court order that bars self-represented litigants from using the court’s

electronic-filing system must include reasonable exceptions or must permit the use of another

electronic method for filing documents and receiving electronic notice of activity in the case.

A court could comply with the amended filing rule by doing either of the following: (1)

allowing reasonable access for self-represented litigants to the court’s electronic-filing system; or

(2) not allowing self-represented litigants to access the court’s electronic-filing system, but

providing them with an alternative electronic means for filing (such as by email or upload) and

an alternative electronic means for receiving notice of court filings and orders (such as an

electronic noticing program). Under the amended filing rule, a court would need to adopt a local

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 9 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

rule or court order disallowing access to the court’s electronic-filing system for self-represented

litigants if it wanted to foreclose such access; the default would be access. The rule would permit

a court to enter an order barring a particular litigant from using the court’s electronic-filing

system.

Part I of this memo recounts a brief history of the project, including efforts to coordinate

the work across the four sets of rules in order to produce a consistent set of provisions. Part II

highlights key features of the proposed amendments. Part III discusses the remaining variances

across the four sets of proposed amendments, including (in Part III.C) one aspect of the proposed

Note language that the Standing Committee may wish to consider standardizing across the rule

sets.

I. Brief history of the project

The proposals discussed here grow out of a multi-year, cross-committee study of

electronic court access for self-represented litigants and of the service consequences that flow

from increasingly electronic court processes. That study began after Judge Bates, then Chair of

the Standing Committee, convened a working group composed of reporters, Rules Office

attorneys, and Federal Judicial Center researchers to consider pending suggestions relating to

electronic filing by self-represented litigants. (The working group would later expand to include

the relevant advisory committees’ clerk representatives, who worked closely with us to provide

real-world expertise and drafting help.) The group first met in December 2021. It was asked not

only to consider possible rule amendments, but also to gather information about actual court

practices, especially in light of developments after the 2018 electronic-filing amendments and

the experience of courts during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 2018 amendments had adopted a

general rule requiring represented parties to file electronically, while treating unrepresented

litigants differently. Under the current national rules, self-represented litigants generally must

file non-electronically unless authorized to file electronically by court order or local rule. The

central policy question for the working group was whether developments since 2018 justified

moving away from that default approach.

The suggestions that prompted renewed consideration shared a common concern: that the

existing rules often left self-represented litigants with less timely, less convenient, and less equal

access to the courts than represented litigants. A number of 2020 submissions urged that selfrepresented litigants be allowed to file electronically for reasons of fairness, safety, disability

accommodation, and equal access. Several of those suggestions were spurred by pandemic

conditions and stressed the burdens and health risks of requiring paper filing through the mail or

in person, as well as the disadvantages self-represented litigants face when they must wait for

paper orders while represented litigants receive immediate electronic notice. 1 John Hawkinson

pointed to districts that categorically barred non-attorney pro se litigants from even seeking

1 See, e.g., Suggestion 20-CV-J (Dr. Usha Jain), available at https://www.uscourts.gov/formsrules/records-rules-committees/suggestions/usha-jain-20-cv-j.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 10 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

electronic-filing privileges and suggested that the rules should discourage such blanket bans,

perhaps by indicating that leave should be freely given. 2 Sai advocated reversing the

presumption against access and replacing it with nationwide presumptive permission for pro se

use of CM/ECF, including for case-initiating filings; treating pro se status as presumptive good

cause for nonelectronic filing; forbidding restrictions based solely on pro se or non-attorney

status; permitting individualized prohibitions for good cause, such as vexatious conduct; and

providing parity with attorney filers as to training and registration, without fees. 3

From the beginning, committee discussions suggested that the problem was not unitary.

The appellate courts appeared to be more receptive to self-represented electronic filing than

district courts, and bankruptcy courts presented distinct concerns because of case-initiation

effects, signature issues, and the availability of electronic self-representation systems.

Meanwhile, another issue surfaced: when a self-represented litigant filed on paper or by another

non-CM/ECF method and the clerk’s office then uploaded the filing to CM/ECF, should the

rules still require that litigant to make separate traditional service on parties who would receive a

notice of electronic filing anyway?

The FJC’s 2022 study of federal courts’ electronic filing practices for pro se litigants

provided the project’s first broad empirical baseline.4 That study showed substantial variation

across court types and districts. The courts of appeals were the most receptive to CM/ECF access

for non-incarcerated self-represented litigants; district courts were much more mixed; and

bankruptcy courts rarely gave self-represented debtors CM/ECF access, though a number used

electronic self-representation systems. The study also confirmed that “electronic filing” could

mean different things: full CM/ECF access, filing by email, and electronic upload portals. 5

2 See Suggestion 20-CV-EE (John A. Hawkinson), available at https://www.uscourts.gov/formsrules/records-rules-committees/suggestions/john-hawkinson-20-cv-ee.

3 See Suggestion 21-CV-J (Sai), available at https://www.uscourts.gov/forms-rules/recordsrules-committees/suggestions/sai-21-cv-j.

4 See Tim Reagan, Carly Giffin, and Roy Germano, Federal Courts’ Electronic Filing by Pro Se

Litigants (FJC 2022), available at https://www.fjc.gov/content/368499/federal-courts-electronicfiling-pro-se-litigants.

An additional FJC study on filing times underscored one practical consequence of

electronic access: because clerk’s offices are open only during limited daytime hours, while

electronic filing ordinarily remains available until midnight, represented litigants are often able

to file after counter hours; indeed, the study found that nearly one third of district-court

responses were filed after 5:00 p.m. See Tim Reagan et al., Electronic Filing Times in Federal

Courts 4 (FJC 2022), available at https://www.fjc.gov/content/365889/electronic-filing-timesfederal-courts.

5 An FJC study of local rules, published in 2025, confirmed that local practice in the district

courts remains varied: “more than two thirds of the federal district courts permit self-represented

litigants to use the court’s electronic filing system at least on a case-by-case basis,” while 29

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 11 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

The advisory committees’ discussions in fall 2022 and early 2023 brought the project into

sharper focus. Across the committees, members raised a number of concerns: the difficulty of

case initiation in CM/ECF, the possibility of inappropriate filings, burdens on clerks’ offices,

training needs, cybersecurity, privacy and sealing issues, and the special problems posed by

prisoner and bankruptcy litigation. At the same time, many participants emphasized the benefits

of broader electronic access: fewer paper filings, reduced mailing burdens, more timely receipt

of court orders and notices, and fewer disputes about what had been filed and when. The

Bankruptcy Rules Committee showed substantial sympathy for the project’s access-to-courts

rationale but also voiced concerns about screening, signatures, and bankruptcy matters that

featured multiple unrepresented litigants. In the Civil Rules Committee discussions, some

skepticism was voiced about whether some aspects of the matter were better handled through

technology and administration rather than rules. The Appellate Rules Committee appeared

relatively open to broader access, reflecting existing appellate practice. And the Criminal Rules

Committee, while seeing less urgency in expanding filing access because of the small number of

nonincarcerated self-represented criminal litigants, showed real interest in the service issue

because it could affect incarcerated litigants and § 2255 movants who otherwise would spend

time and limited funds sending paper copies to recipients already receiving electronic notice.

To test the service issue and the practical consequences of broader access, Dr. Tim

Reagan and I conducted follow-up interviews in spring 2023 with court personnel from districts

that had eliminated redundant service requirements (some of which had also broadened

electronic access).6 Interviewees from districts that exempted self-represented paper filers from

separately serving CM/ECF participants reported that the practice worked well and imposed no

additional burden on clerks’ offices. The interviews also suggested that courts providing

CM/ECF access or other electronic pathways to self-represented litigants generally viewed those

programs positively, citing reduced paper handling, easier service of court orders, and creation of

a reliable electronic record. Although questions remained about sealed filings, staffing, training,

and the rare case involving multiple self-represented litigants, the interviews materially

strengthened the case for a service amendment and narrowed the factual uncertainties

surrounding increased access.

By 2023 and 2024, work focused on the two subjects now reflected in the current

districts “generally prohibit” such use; the study also found continued use in a number of courts

of alternatives such as email filing, online portals, and electronic-noticing programs. See Tim

Reagan, United States District Courts’ Local Rules and Procedures on Electronic Filing by SelfRepresented Litigants 1 (FJC 2025), available at https://www.fjc.gov/content/391989/unitedstates-district-courts-local-rules-and-procedures-electronic-filing-self.

6 See September 18, 2023 memorandum concerning spring 2023 district-court interviews,

included starting at page 264 of the Civil Rules Committee’s fall 2023 agenda book, available at

https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/202310_civil_rules_committee_meeting_agenda_book_11-6_final_0.pdf.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 12 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

proposals. The first concerns filing: whether the rules should presumptively permit selfrepresented litigants to file electronically, subject to court order or local rule, and whether courts

that generally bar use of the court’s electronic-filing system should be required either to make

reasonable exceptions or to provide another electronic means for filing and receiving notice. The

second concerns service: whether the rules should eliminate the requirement that a selfrepresented litigant separately serve papers filed after the complaint on persons who will receive

a notice of filing through the court’s electronic-filing system or a court-based electronic-noticing

program. In fall 2024, the committees reviewed a tentative sketch of a possible amendment to

Civil Rule 5 that embodied those two policy choices.

The Bankruptcy Rules Committee’s position changed significantly over the course of the

project. Although bankruptcy participants were initially sympathetic to the project’s access-tocourts rationale, by late 2024 and early 2025 the Committee appeared likely to decline

participation because of concerns about case initiation, signatures and verification, burdens on

clerk’s offices, inappropriate filings, and the possibility of multiple self-represented participants

who might not know whom they still had to serve by paper. In April 2025, however, rather than

definitively opting out, the Committee referred the matter to its Technology, Privacy, and Public

Access Subcommittee for further study. In summer 2025, that Subcommittee concluded that the

Committee should join the project at least through publication, both to preserve consistency with

the other rules sets and to obtain the benefit of public comment. The Committee voted in

September 2025 to participate on that basis. At the same time, some Bankruptcy Rules

Committee members continued to express reservations and indicated that they viewed

publication as a way to gather further information; depending on the comments received, they

might oppose final adoption after publication.

By early spring 2026 the working-group participants had fashioned the coordinated set of

proposed amendments. Prior to the Advisory Committee meetings, the Style Consultants to the

Standing Committee provided a thorough and helpful review of the package of proposed

amendments.

II. Key features of the proposals

The proposed amendments address two related topics: electronic filing by selfrepresented litigants and service of papers after the complaint on persons who receive electronic

notice through the court’s filing system or a court-based electronic-noticing program. Across the

affected rules, the proposals would move the national rules away from a presumption against

electronic access for self-represented litigants and toward a presumption in favor of such access,

while preserving courts’ authority to impose reasonable limits. At the same time, the proposals

would eliminate redundant paper service when the court’s system will generate a notice of case

activity to the recipient.

As to filing, the central change is that self-represented litigants would be presumptively

allowed to use the court’s electronic-filing system to file papers and receive notice of activity in

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 13 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

the case, unless a court order or local rule provides otherwise. Under the current rules, the default

runs in the opposite direction: a self-represented litigant may file electronically only if a court

order or local rule allows it. The proposed amendments would reverse that presumption in

Appellate Rule 25, Bankruptcy Rules 5005 and 8011, Civil Rule 5, and Criminal Rule 49. In the

Appellate, Bankruptcy, and Civil Rules, the proposals would retain the existing authority to

require electronic filing by an unrepresented litigant by case-specific order or by local rule with

reasonable exceptions. The Criminal Rules proposal differs slightly in wording because Criminal

Rule 49 currently does not authorize requiring all self-represented parties to file electronically,

but the proposal likewise would allow self-represented parties to use the system unless restricted

by order or local rule.

The proposals do not create an unlimited right of electronic access. Each set of

amendments would expressly authorize courts to impose reasonable conditions and restrictions

on access. The Committee Notes give examples such as limiting access to nonincarcerated

litigants, requiring training or certifications, restricting certain categories of filings, or denying or

revoking access for a particular litigant. But the proposals would also place a new national limit

on blanket local bans: a court could not bar all self-represented litigants from using the court’s

electronic-filing system unless the prohibition either includes reasonable exceptions or is paired

with another electronic method for filing papers (such as email filing or an upload portal) and

receiving notice (such as a court-based noticing program). In that respect, the proposals seek not

only to expand access to CM/ECF itself, but also to ensure that courts maintaining more

restrictive CM/ECF regimes still provide some meaningful electronic path for filing and notice.

As to service, the proposals would eliminate the need for separate paper service of postcomplaint filings on persons who will receive a notice of case activity through the court’s

electronic-filing system. This change applies in Appellate Rule 25, Bankruptcy Rules 8011 and

9036, Civil Rule 5, and Criminal Rule 49. The basic idea is straightforward: when a selfrepresented litigant files a paper document or uses another non-CM/ECF method, court staff

ordinarily upload that filing into the electronic docket. Once that occurs, the court’s system

generates an electronic notice to registered recipients. The proposals would treat that notice of

case activity as service, so the filer need not also serve those same recipients separately on paper.

This extends to self-represented non-electronic filers the same practical benefit already enjoyed

when a registered user serves another registered user through the electronic-filing system.

The service provisions are also reorganized to reflect the modern primacy of service

through the court’s electronic system. In each rules set, service by a notice of case activity is

addressed first, and the proposals add a common definition of “notice of case activity” broad

enough to include “notice of electronic filing,” “notice of docket activity,” and similar future

terminology. The proposals preserve other service methods as alternatives, including (variously)

other consented-to electronic means, personal delivery, mail, and commercial carrier. This is

important because a filer may still wish to serve by another permissible means before the clerk’s

office uploads a non-electronic filing and the system generates the notice.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 14 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

The proposals also address when service by notice of case activity is complete. For

purposes of deadlines to make service, service by the notice of case activity would be treated as

complete on the date of filing. But for deadlines that run from the date of service, service by the

notice of case activity would be treated as complete on the date of the notice of case activity.

That distinction is meant to protect the recipient in the event there is a lag between the time the

filing is received by the court and the time it is uploaded into the electronic system. The

proposals likewise carry forward the current principle that electronic service is not effective if

the filer learns that it did not reach the intended recipient. They also allow courts, by order or

local rule, to require other means of service for sealed filings; the appellate proposal additionally

allows a local requirement of other-means service for certain case-initiating proceedings in the

court of appeals.

Finally, the package includes a few conforming amendments. Civil Rule 5 and Criminal

Rule 49 are revised so that no certificate of service is required when service occurs through the

court’s electronic-filing system under the amended provisions. Civil Rule 6, Criminal Rule 45,

and Bankruptcy Rule 9006 are amended to conform cross-references governing the extra three

days added after certain kinds of service.

III. Remaining variances

The enclosed comparison chart shows the text of the proposed Rules across the different

Rule sets. As is customary for joint committee projects, the participants strove to maintain

parallel treatment across the four rule sets. As is also not unusual, there do remain some aspects

of the proposals as to which the committees’ approaches diverge. The remainder of this memo

focuses on explaining those divergences.

A. Self-represented litigant (“SRL”) provisions generally: “unrepresented” versus

“self-represented”

The Bankruptcy, Civil, and Appellate Rules proposals use the term “unrepresented” to

describe self-represented litigants, whereas the Criminal Rule uses “self-represented.” Though

the latter term is preferred by many project participants, implementing that preference is not

practicable in the Bankruptcy, Civil, and Appellate Rules because too many existing rules in

those sets would have to be amended correspondingly.

This difference seems warranted by differences between the rules sets (that is, that the

current Criminal Rules use the term “unrepresented” only in Rule 49). Notably, the proposed

amendments to Criminal Rule 17 presented for final approval in this agenda book use the term

“self-represented.”

This variance seems justified.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 15 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

SRL e-filing: Self-represented “parties” or self-represented “individuals”

Three of the four rule sets would extend the new e-filing default approach only to selfrepresented “parties,” but the Bankruptcy Rules proposal would extend it to self-represented

“individuals.” The reason for the difference has to do with concerns that may balance out

differently in the bankruptcy context.

The current rules vary in the term that they use to denote an unrepresented filer. Criminal

Rule 49 says “party,” Appellate Rule 25 and Civil Rule 5 say “person,” and the Bankruptcy

Rules say “individual.” (Terminology in the Bankruptcy Rules is affected by the definitions in

the Bankruptcy Code.)

The self-represented litigant e-filing provisions proposed for the Civil, Criminal, and

Appellate Rules refer to access for unrepresented “parties.” This is a shift from the current Civil

and Appellate Rules (which refer to an unrepresented “person”), though it carries forward current

Criminal Rule 49’s reference to a self-represented “party.” The reason for the shift is that the

amended provision flips the default presumption from one of non-access to one of access to the

court’s electronic-filing system. Once the presumption is inverted to say that self-represented

litigants may e-file unless barred by order or local rule, it seems advisable to change “person” to

“party” so that lay people who are not parties to the case do not cite the rule as granting them

access.7 In the Criminal Rules context, there is an additional reason to use “party” – that is,

because that is the term used in current Criminal Rule 49. Criminal Rule 49(b)(3)(B) deals only

with electronic filing by a “party not represented by an attorney.” Meanwhile, Criminal Rule

49(c) provides: “A nonparty may serve and file a paper only if doing so is required or permitted

by law. A nonparty must serve every party as required by Rule 49(a), but may use the court's

electronic-filing system only if allowed by court order or local rule.”

The self-represented litigant e-filing provisions proposed for Bankruptcy Rules 5005 and

8011 refer to access for unrepresented “individuals.” Current Rules 5005 and 8011 also use the

term “individual.” The Bankruptcy Rules Committee considered and rejected the term

“unrepresented party,” because it is concerned that that term would erroneously suggest to

readers that a nonhuman litigant could represent itself. To avoid that possibility, the Bankruptcy

Rules Committee determined that the Bankruptcy Rules should continue to use “individual,”

which is the term those rules use to refer to a human being.

As Professor Gibson succinctly put it, the choice between “party” and “individual”

depends on a judgment call about “which is more likely (or more harmful): [1] having someone

read ‘unrepresented party’ to mean any party (whether a real person or not) can appear without

an attorney, or [2] having someone read ‘unrepresented individual’ to mean you don’t need to be

connected to a case to file a paper in it.” The Bankruptcy Rules Committee’s decision to use

7 We have heard from participants that, from the clerk’s perspective, it’s important that the rule

draw that boundary.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 16 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

“individual” may be justified by features specific to bankruptcy practice – that is, the number of

artificial entities (e.g., small creditors) that may participate in a bankruptcy proceeding and might

wish to appear without a lawyer. Meanwhile, the other three sets of rules already use words (to

denote unrepresented litigants) that encompass artificial entities – they say either “person” (Civil

and Appellate) or “party” (Criminal) – and we haven’t heard of those terms giving rise to any

erroneous assumptions that artificial entities can appear without a lawyer; so the Bankruptcy

Rules Committee’s concern may not be as salient for the other three sets of rules.

Accordingly, this variance seems justifiable.

C. SRL e-filing: Note language on requiring court permission to use e-filing system

As presented in the Advisory Committee agenda books, the Committee Notes to the

proposed electronic-filing provisions included a bracketed sentence concerning the permissibility

of a local provision requiring unrepresented parties to obtain court permission to use the court’s

e-filing system. This language was included in the draft based on a suggestion from a member of

the Criminal Rules Committee.

The bracketed statement – as shown in the Civil, Bankruptcy, and Criminal agenda

books – read: “[For example, local provisions that require unrepresented parties who seek to

use the court’s electronic-filing system to obtain permission from the judge to whom the case is

assigned would count as including reasonable exceptions, so long as such permission is not

unreasonably withheld in practice.]”

Although the Civil and Bankruptcy Rules Committees voted to approve the draft for

publication with this sentence included in the relevant Committee Notes, the sentence drew

attention and a good deal of skeptical comment, particularly in the Civil Rules Committee

discussion. On one hand, including this language would recognize existing practices in more

than half of the federal courts of appeals and district courts 9 and would give clerks’ offices

something to point to when applying a requirement that a self-represented litigant seek court

permission in order to use the court’s electronic-filing system. On the other hand, because it

would be challenging for an unrepresented party to demonstrate that a court unreasonably

withholds permission in practice, participants expressed concern that this Note language might

seem to bless local provisions that effectively deny e-filing to unrepresented parties in general.

8 The relevant sentence in the Note to Appellate Rule 25 as set out in the Appellate Rules

Committee’s agenda book was similar but not identical.

9 See Tim Reagan, United States District Courts’ Local Rules and Procedures on Electronic

Filing by Self-Represented Litigants (FJC 2025) at 1 (reporting that 54 federal districts “permit

self-represented litigants to request permission to use the electronic filing system”); Tim Reagan,

Carly Giffin, and Roy Germano, Federal Courts’ Electronic Filing by Pro Se Litigants (FJC

2025) at 6-7 (reporting that seven courts of appeals “allow [pro se litigants to register as

CM/ECF users] with individual permission”).

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 17 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

During the Appellate Rules Committee meeting, a member proposed revised language –

which the Appellate Rules Committee adopted – that accounts for the concerns of both

participants who favored the original bracketed language and participants who were concerned

by that original language. The revised language adopted by the Appellate Rules Committee

reads: “A local provision requiring unrepresented parties to obtain the court’s permission in

order to use the court’s electronic-filing system would count as including reasonable exceptions,

so long as such permission is granted or withheld in accordance with the reasonable conditions

and restrictions on access set by the court.” (The concluding phrase refers back to the ‘reasonable

conditions and restrictions’ that are discussed earlier in the Committee Note.) The hope is that

with this change, the Note language validates the practices of courts that wish to build in a

requirement of court permission, while avoiding the risk that the Note would seem to bless the

practice of a court where standardless discretion to withhold permission results in effective

denial of access in practice.

Because the Appellate Rules Committee met after the Civil and Bankruptcy Rules

Committees, those two committees did not have the opportunity to consider the Appellate Rules

Committee’s revised language. The Criminal Rules Committee met last. Though some support

was voiced for the Note language as set forth in the Criminal Rules Committee’s agenda book,

the Committee ultimately voted to adopt language paralleling the Appellate Committee Note. As

adopted by the Criminal Rules Committee, the relevant sentence in the Criminal Rule 49

Committee Note reads: “For example, local provisions that require self-represented parties who

seek to use the court’s electronic-filing system to obtain the court’s permission would count as

including reasonable exceptions, so long as such permission is granted or withheld in accordance

with the reasonable conditions and restrictions on access set by the court.”

I recommend that the Standing Committee consider adopting similar language for the

Committee Notes to Civil Rule 5(d)(2)(B), Bankruptcy Rule 5005(a)(3)(B), and Bankruptcy

Rule 8011(a)(2)(C). That proposed language is shown as a bracketed alternative in those

Committee Notes, following the bracketed sentence that originally appeared in the Civil and

Bankruptcy Rules Committees’ agenda books. *

D. SRL e-filing: “in the case” versus “in the party’s case”

Proposed Bankruptcy Rules 5005(a)(3)(B)(i) and 8011(a)(2)(C)(i) refer to “receiv[ing]

notice of activity in the case,” while proposed Appellate Rule 25(a)(2)(C)(i), Civil Rule

5(d)(2)(B)(i), and Criminal Rule 49(b)(2)(B)(i) refer to “receiv[ing] notice of activity in the

party’s case.” The latter three rules specify “in the party’s case” because we have heard from

clerk participants how important it is to make clear that the default principle of access to e-filing

should extend only to the case in which the SRL is a party, and not to other cases. But the

Bankruptcy Rules will say, simply, “in the case” – because in the bankruptcy context, there is a

Revised August 14, 2026: The Standing Committee approved the proposed bracketed alternative

language in the committee notes at its June 2026 meeting.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 18 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

concern that saying “in the individual’s case” would suggest that the denoted individual must

always be the debtor, and that’s not true, because the rule is designed to extend to selfrepresented human creditors as well.

This variance seems justified.

E. SRL e-filing: requirements to file electronically

This variance is carried forward from the existing rules. Unlike the other SRL e-filing

default rules, proposed Criminal Rule 49(b)(2)(B)(i) (like existing Criminal Rule 49(b)(3)(B))

contains no provision about the circumstances under which a SRL can be required to e-file,

because the Criminal Rules Committee has made a judgment call that the Criminal Rule

shouldn’t authorize a court to require a SRL to e-file. As the 2018 Committee Note to Criminal

Rule 49 explains,

[Rule 49](b)(3)(B) requires unrepresented parties to file nonelectronically,

unless allowed to file electronically by court order or local rule. This language

differs from that of the amended Civil Rule, which provides that an unrepresented

party may be “required” to file electronically by a court order or local rule that

allows reasonable exceptions. A different approach to electronic filing by

unrepresented parties is needed in criminal cases, where electronic filing by pro se

prisoners presents significant challenges. Pro se parties filing papers under the

criminal rules generally lack the means to e-file or receive electronic

confirmations, yet must be provided access to the courts under the Constitution.

This variance has already been determined to be justified.

F. E-filing and signatures

Currently, all five relevant rules contain (with immaterial variations) the following

provision, added in 2018: “A filing made through a person’s electronic-filing account and

authorized by that person, together with that person’s name on a signature block, constitutes the

person's signature.” See, e.g., Civil Rule 5(d)(3)(C).

The Bankruptcy Rules Committee has decided to amend their signature provisions to use

“individual” instead of “person.” Their reason is that “person” (as defined in Section 101 of the

Bankruptcy Code) includes some artificial entities, and that it does not make sense to refer to an

artificial entity as having its own electronic-filing account and engaging in the act of signing. As

noted above, to denote human entities, the Bankruptcy Rules use the term “individual.”

The Bankruptcy Code’s definitions are not relevant to the non-bankruptcy rule sets, and

“person” has been used in all the signature rules for nearly eight years without causing any

perceptible problem, so no change to the non-bankruptcy rules’ signature provisions is proposed

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 19 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report on Self-Represented Litigants’ Filing and Service

for the other three sets of rules.

Approving the Bankruptcy Rules Committee’s proposal to amend their signature

provisions to use “individual” does not seem to me to provide a reason to require the other three

Advisory Committees to similarly amend their signature provisions.

G. “Documents” versus “papers”

The choice between referring to “documents” or to “papers” is not substantive. But it is a

considered choice.

Bankruptcy Rule 5005, Civil Rule 5, Criminal Rule 49, and (in the main) Appellate Rule

25 use the word “paper,” while Bankruptcy Rules 8011 and 9036 use the word “document.” On

the theory that internal consistency within a rule may be more valuable than consistency across

rules, the proposals use “paper” in the amendments to Bankruptcy Rule 5005, Civil Rule 5,

Criminal Rule 49, and Appellate Rule 25, but use “document” in the amendments to Bankruptcy

Rules 8011 and 9036.

*****

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 20 of 209

SRL provision comparison chart, April 30, 2026

This comparison chart shows – as clean rule text – the various SRL e-ﬁling and service provisions, along with other related provisions in the

a ected rules.

Bankruptcy (not

appellate)

E-ﬁling general rule:

Bankruptcy Rule

5005(a)(3)(A): (3)

Electronic Filing and

Signing.

(A) By a Represented

Entity--Generally

Required; Exceptions.

An entity represented by

an attorney must ﬁle

electronically, unless

nonelectronic ﬁling is

allowed by the court for

cause or is allowed or

required by local rule.

Bankruptcy (appellate)

Appellate

Civil

Criminal

E-ﬁling general rule:

Bankruptcy Rule

8011(a)(2)(B): (B)

Electronic Filing By a

Represented Entity—

Generally Required;

Exceptions. An entity

represented by an

attorney must ﬁle

electronically, unless

nonelectronic ﬁling is

allowed by the court for

cause or is allowed or

required by local rule.

E-ﬁling general rule:

FRAP 25(a)(2)(B): (B)

Electronic Filing by a

Person Represented by

Counsel--Generally

Required; Exceptions. A

person represented by an

attorney must ﬁle

electronically, unless

nonelectronic ﬁling is

allowed by the court for

good cause or is allowed

or required by local rule.

E-ﬁling general rule:

Civil Rule 5(d)(2)(A): (2)

Electronic Filing and

Signing.

(A) By a Person

Represented by

Counsel—Generally

Required; Exceptions. A

person represented by an

attorney must ﬁle

electronically, unless

nonelectronic ﬁling is

allowed by the court for

good cause or is allowed

or required by local rule.

E-ﬁling general rule:

Criminal Rule 49(b)(2)(A):

(2) Electronic Filing and

Signing. (A) By a Party

Represented by Counsel

– Generally Required;

Exceptions. A party

represented by an

attorney must ﬁle

electronically, unless

nonelectronic ﬁling is

allowed by the court for

good cause or is allowed

or required by local rule.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 21 of 209

E-ﬁling SRL default rule:

Bankruptcy Rule

5005(a)(3)(B)(i): (B) By an

Unrepresented

Individual—When

Allowed or Required.

(i) In General. An

unrepresented individual

may use the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

to ﬁle papers and receive

notice of activity in the

case, unless a court order

or local rule prohibits the

individual from doing so.

An unrepresented

individual may be

required to ﬁle

electronically only by

order in a case or by a

local rule that includes

reasonable exceptions.

E-ﬁling SRL default rule:

Bankruptcy Rule

8011(a)(2)(C)(i): (C)

Electronic Filing By an

Unrepresented

Individual—When

Allowed or Required.

(i) In General. An

unrepresented individual

may use the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

to ﬁle documents and

receive notice of activity

in the case, unless a

court order or local rule

prohibits the individual

from doing so. An

unrepresented individual

may be required to ﬁle

electronically only by

order in a case or by a

local rule that includes

reasonable exceptions.

E-ﬁling SRL default rule:

FRAP 25(a)(2)(C)(i): (C)

Electronic Filing by an

Unrepresented Party-When Allowed or

Required.

(i) In General. An

unrepresented party may

use the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

to ﬁle papers and receive

notice of activity in the

party’s case, unless a

court order or local rule

prohibits the party from

doing so. An

unrepresented person

may be required to ﬁle

electronically only by

order in a case or by a

local rule that includes

reasonable exceptions.

E-ﬁling SRL default rule:

Civil Rule 5(d)(2)(B)(i): (B)

By an Unrepresented

Party—When Allowed or

Required.

(i) In General. An

unrepresented party may

use the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

to ﬁle papers and receive

notice of activity in the

party’s case, unless a

court order or local rule

prohibits the party from

doing so. An

unrepresented person

may be required to ﬁle

electronically only by

order in a case or by a

local rule that includes

reasonable exceptions.

E-ﬁling SRL default rule:

Criminal Rule

49(b)(2)(B)(i): (B) By a

Self-Represented Party

– When Allowed.

(i) In General. A selfrepresented party may

use the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

to ﬁle papers and receive

notice of activity in the

party’s case, unless a

court order or local rule

prohibits the party from

doing so.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 22 of 209

E-ﬁling SRL conditions:

Bankruptcy Rule

5005(a)(3)(B)(ii): (ii)

Conditions and

Restrictions on Access.

A court may set and

enforce reasonable

conditions and

restrictions on

unrepresented

individuals’ access to the

court’s electronic-ﬁling

system (including by

denying or revoking

access for a particular

unrepresented

individual). But the court

may not prohibit all

unrepresented

individuals from using the

system unless that

prohibition includes

reasonable exceptions or

the court permits the use

of another electronic

method for ﬁling papers

and receiving electronic

notice of activity in the

case.

E-ﬁling SRL conditions:

Bankruptcy Rule

8011(a)(2)(C)(ii): (ii)

Conditions and

Restrictions on Access.

A court may set and

enforce reasonable

conditions and

restrictions on

unrepresented

individuals’ access to the

court’s electronic-ﬁling

system (including by

denying or revoking

access for a particular

unrepresented

individual). But the court

may not prohibit all

unrepresented

individuals from using the

system unless that

prohibition includes

reasonable exceptions or

the court permits the use

of another electronic

method for ﬁling

documents and receiving

electronic notice of

activity in the case.

E-ﬁling SRL conditions:

FRAP 25(a)(2)(C)(ii): (ii)

Conditions and

Restrictions on Access.

A court may set and

enforce reasonable

conditions and

restrictions on

unrepresented parties’

access to the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

(including by denying or

revoking access for a

particular unrepresented

party). But the court may

not prohibit all

unrepresented parties

from using the system

unless that prohibition

includes reasonable

exceptions or the court

permits the use of

another electronic

method for ﬁling papers

and receiving electronic

notice of activity in the

party’s case.

E-ﬁling SRL conditions:

Civil Rule 5(d)(2)(B)(ii):

(ii) Conditions and

Restrictions on Access.

A court may set and

enforce reasonable

conditions and

restrictions on

unrepresented parties’

access to the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

(including by denying or

revoking access for a

particular unrepresented

party). But the court may

not prohibit all

unrepresented parties

from using the system

unless that prohibition

includes reasonable

exceptions or the court

permits the use of

another electronic

method for ﬁling papers

and receiving electronic

notice of activity in the

party’s case.

E-ﬁling SRL conditions:

Criminal Rule

49(b)(2)(B)(ii): (ii)

Conditions and

Restrictions on Access.

A court may set and

enforce reasonable

conditions and

restrictions on selfrepresented parties’

access to the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

(including by denying or

revoking access for a

particular selfrepresented party). But

the court may not

prohibit all selfrepresented parties from

using the system unless

that prohibition includes

reasonable exceptions or

the court permits the use

of another electronic

method for ﬁling papers

and receiving electronic

notice of activity in the

party’s case.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 23 of 209

E-ﬁling & signature:

Bankruptcy Rule

5005(a)(3)(C): (C)

Signing. A ﬁling made

through an individual’s

electronic-ﬁling account

and authorized by that

individual, together with

the individual’s name on

a signature block,

constitutes the

individual’s signature.

E-ﬁling & signature:

Bankruptcy Rule 8011(e):

(e) Signature Always

Required.

(1) Electronic Filing.

Every document ﬁled

electronically must

include the electronic

signature of the individual

ﬁling it or, if an entity is

represented, the

counsel's electronic

signature. A ﬁling made

through an individual’s

electronic-ﬁling account

and authorized by that

individual—together with

that individual’s name on

a signature block—

constitutes the

individual’s signature.

(2) Paper Filing. Every

document ﬁled in paper

form must be signed by

the individual ﬁling it or, if

an entity is represented,

by the entity’s counsel.

E-ﬁling & signature:

FRAP 25(a)(2)(D): (D)

Signing. A ﬁling made

through a person's

electronic-ﬁling account

and authorized by that

person, together with that

person's name on a

signature block,

constitutes the person's

signature.

E-ﬁling & signature:

Civil Rule 5(d)(2)(C): (C)

Signing. A ﬁling made

through a person's

electronic-ﬁling account

and authorized by that

person, together with that

person's name on a

signature block,

constitutes the person's

signature.

E-ﬁling & signature:

Criminal Rule 49(b)(2)(D):

(D) Signature. A ﬁling

made through a person's

electronic-ﬁling account

and authorized by that

person, together with the

person's name on a

signature block,

constitutes the person's

signature.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 24 of 209

Service required:

[NB: No need to revise

Rule 5005(b) (“Sending

Copies to the United

States Trustee”), because

it does not specify that

sending must be “at or

before the time of ﬁling.”

Rule 9036 does not

include a provision

requiring service.]

Service required:

Rule 8011(b): (b) Service

of All Documents

Required. Unless a rule

requires service by the

clerk or the document

will be served through the

court’s electronic-ﬁling

system under (c)(1), a

party must, at or before

the time of the ﬁling of a

document, serve it on the

other parties to the

appeal. Service on a

party represented by

counsel must be made

on the party's counsel.

Service required:

FRAP 25(b): (b) Service

of All Papers Required.

Unless a rule requires

service by the clerk or the

paper will be served

through the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

under Rule 25(c)(1), a

party must, at or before

the time of ﬁling a paper,

serve a copy on the other

parties to the appeal or

review. Service on a party

represented by counsel

must be made on the

party's counsel.

Service required:

[NB: No need to revise

Civil Rule 5(a) (“Service:

When Required”),

because it does not

specify that service must

be “at or before the time

of ﬁling.”]

Service required:

[NB: No need to revise

Criminal Rule 49(a)(1)

(“Service on a Party.

What is Required”),

because it does not

specify that service must

be “at or before the time

of ﬁling.”]

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 25 of 209

Service by NCA:

Rule 9036(c)(1): (c)

Notices from and

Service by an Entity. (1)

Notice of Case Activity

Sent Through the

Court’s Electronic-Filing

System. A notice of case

activity sent to an entity

registered to receive it

through the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

constitutes notice or

service on that entity,

with these qualiﬁcations:

(A) such notice or service

is not e ective if the ﬁler

learns that it did not

reach the entity to be

notiﬁed or served; and

(B) a court may provide by

order or local rule that if a

document is ﬁled under

seal, neither service nor

notice occurs under this

paragraph (c)(1).

Service by NCA:

Rule 8011(c)(1): (c)

Manner of Service.

(1) Service by a Notice

of Case Activity Sent

Through the Court’s

Electronic-Filing

System. A notice of case

activity sent to an entity

registered to receive it

through the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

constitutes service on

that entity, with these

qualiﬁcations:

(A) such service is not

e ective if the ﬁler learns

that it did not reach the

entity to be served; and

(B) a court may provide by

order or local rule that if a

document is ﬁled under

seal, it must be served by

other means.

Service by NCA:

FRAP 25(c)(1): (c)

Manner of Service.

(1) Service by a Notice

of Case Activity Sent

Through the Court’s

Electronic-Filing

System. A notice of case

activity sent to a person

registered to receive it

through the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

constitutes service on

that person, with these

qualiﬁcations:

(A) such service is not

e ective if the ﬁler learns

that it did not reach the

person to be served; and

(B) a court may provide by

order or local rule that if a

paper is ﬁled under seal

or initiates a proceeding

in the court of appeals

under Rule 5, 6(c), 15, or

21, it must be served by

other means.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Service by NCA:

Civil Rule 5(b)(2): (b)

Service: How Made.…

(2) Service by a Notice of

Case Activity Sent

Through the Court’s

Electronic-Filing System.

A notice of case activity

sent to a person registered

to receive it through the

court’s electronic-ﬁling

system constitutes

service on that person. For

any service deadlines,

service by a notice of case

activity is complete as of

the date of ﬁling. For any

deadlines that run from

the date of service, service

by a notice of case activity

is complete as of the

notice’s date. But these

qualiﬁcations apply:

(A) such service is not

e ective if the ﬁler learns

that it did not reach the

person to be served; and

(B) a court may provide by

order or local rule that if a

paper is ﬁled under seal, it

must be served by other

means.

Service by NCA:

Criminal Rule 49(a)(3):

(3) Service by a Notice

of Case Activity Sent

Through the Court’s

Electronic-Filing

System. A notice of case

activity sent to a person

registered to receive it

through the court’s

electronic-ﬁling system

constitutes service on

that person. For any

service deadlines,

service by a notice of

case activity is complete

as of the date of ﬁling. For

any deadlines that run

from the date of service,

service by a notice of

case activity is complete

as of the notice’s date.

But these qualiﬁcations

apply:

(A) such service is not

e ective if the ﬁler learns

that it did not reach the

person to be served; and

(B) a court may provide

by order or local rule that

if a paper is ﬁled under

seal, it must be served by

other means.

Page 26 of 209

Service / other

electronic means:

[NB: Rule 9036 focuses

on electronic notice &

service, so its “other

means” provision focuses

only on other electronic

means.] Rule 9036(c)(2):

(2) Electronic Means

Consented To. An entity

may also send notice or

serve a document by

electronic means that the

recipient consented to in

writing, including by

designating an electronic

address for receiving

notices. But such notice

or service is not e ective

if the sender learns that it

did not reach the entity to

be notiﬁed or served.

Service / other means:

Rule 8011(c)(2): (2)

Service by Other Means.

A document may also be

served under this rule by:

(A) personal delivery;

(B) mail;

commercial carrier for

delivery within 3 days; or

(D) electronic means that

the entity served has

consented to in writing,

but such electronic

service is not e ective if

the sender learns that it

did not reach the entity to

be served.

FRAP 25(c)(2): (2)

Service by Other Means.

A paper may also be

served under this rule by:

(A) personal delivery,

including delivery to a

responsible person at the

o ice of counsel;

(B) mail;

commercial carrier for

delivery within 3 days; or

(D) sending it by

electronic means that the

person to be served has

consented to in writing,

but such electronic

service is not e ective if

the sender learns that it

did not reach the person

to be served.

Civil Rule 5(b)(3): (3)

Service by Other Means.

A paper may also be

served under this rule by:

(A) handing it to the

person;

(B) leaving it:

(i) at the person’s o ice

with a clerk or other

person in charge or, if no

one is in charge, in a

conspicuous place in the

o ice; or

(ii) if the person has no

o ice or the o ice is

closed, at the person’s

dwelling or usual place of

abode with someone of

suitable age and

discretion who resides

there;

person’s last known

address—in which event

service is complete upon

mailing;

(D) leaving it with the

court clerk if the person

has no known address;

Criminal Rule 49(a)(4):

(4) Service by Other

Means. A paper may also

be served by:

(A) handing it to the

person;

(B) leaving it:

(i) at the person's o ice

with a clerk or other

person in charge or, if no

one is in charge, in a

conspicuous place in the

o ice; or

(ii) if the person has no

o ice or the o ice is

closed, at the person's

dwelling or usual place of

abode with someone of

suitable age and

discretion who resides

there;

person's last known

address – in which event

service is complete upon

mailing;

(D) leaving it with the

court clerk if the person

has no known address;

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 27 of 209

(E) sending it by

electronic means that the

person has consented to

in writing—in which event

service is complete upon

sending, but is not

e ective if the sender

learns that it did not

reach the person to be

served; or

(F) delivering it by any

other means that the

person has consented to

in writing—in which event

service is complete when

the person making

service delivers it to the

agency designated to

make delivery.

(E) sending it by

electronic means that the

person has consented to

in writing – in which event

service is complete upon

sending, but is not

e ective if the sender

learns that it did not

reach the person to be

served; or

(F) delivering it by any

other means that the

person has consented to

in writing—in which event

service is complete when

the person making

service delivers it to the

agency designated to

make delivery.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 28 of 209

Service / completeness:

Rule 9036(d): (d) When

Notice or Service Is

Complete; Keeping an

Address Current.

(1) Notice of Case

Activity Sent Through

the Court’s ElectronicFiling System.

For any notice or service

deadlines, notice or

service by a notice of

case activity is complete

as of the date of ﬁling. For

any deadlines that run

from the date of notice or

service, notice or service

by a notice of case

activity is complete as of

the date of the notice of

case activity.

(2) Other Electronic

Means. Electronic notice

or service by other

electronic means is

complete upon sending.

Service / completeness:

Rule 8011(c)(3): (3)

When Service Is

Complete.

(A) For Service by a

Notice of Case Activity.

For any service

deadlines, service by a

notice of case activity is

complete as of the date

of ﬁling. For any

deadlines that run from

the date of service,

service by a notice of

case activity is complete

as of the notice’s date.

(B) For Service by Other

Electronic Means.

Service by other

electronic means is

complete on sending.

or Commercial Carrier.

Service by mail or by

third-party commercial

carrier is complete on

mailing or delivery to the

carrier.

Service / completeness:

FRAP 25(c)(4): (4) When

Service Is Complete.

(A) For Service by Mail or

Commercial Carrier.

Service by mail or by

commercial carrier is

complete on mailing or

delivery to the carrier.

(B) For Service by a

Notice of Case Activity.

For any service

deadlines, service by a

notice of case activity is

complete as of the date

of ﬁling. For any

deadlines that run from

the date of service,

service by a notice of

case activity is complete

as of the notice’s date.

Electronic Means.

Service by other

electronic means is

complete on sending.

Service / completeness:

[Civil Rule 5 does not

have a discrete subpart

focused on

completeness. Rather,

the current rule

addresses completeness

in Rule 5(b)(2)(C), (E), and

(F). The amended rule

retains those mentions of

completeness and

addresses completeness

for service by means of

the NCA in Rule 5(b)(2).]

Civil Rule 5(b)(2): For any

service deadlines,

service by a notice of

case activity is complete

as of the date of ﬁling. For

any deadlines that run

from the date of service,

service by a notice of

case activity is complete

as of the notice’s date.

Service / completeness:

[Criminal Rule 49 does

not have a discrete

subpart focused on

completeness. Rather,

the current rule

addresses completeness

in Rules 49(a)(3)(A) & (B)

and 49(a)(4)(C) & (E). The

amended rule retains

(though relocates) three

of these mentions of

completeness and

addresses completeness

for service by means of

the NCA in Rule 49(a)(3).]

Criminal Rule 49(a)(3):

For any service

deadlines, service by a

notice of case activity is

complete as of the date

of ﬁling. For any

deadlines that run from

the date of service,

service by a notice of

case activity is complete

as of the notice’s date.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 29 of 209

NCA deﬁned:

Rule 9036(c)(3): (3)

Deﬁnition of “Notice of

Case Activity.” The term

“notice of case activity”

includes a notice of

docket activity, a notice

of electronic ﬁling, and

any other similar

electronic notice

provided to case

participants through the

court’s electronic-ﬁling

system to inform them of

activity on the docket.

NCA deﬁned:

Rule 8011(c)(4): (4)

Deﬁnition of “Notice of

Case Activity.” The term

“notice of case activity”

includes a notice of

docket activity, a notice

of electronic ﬁling, and

any other similar

electronic notice

provided to case

participants through the

court’s electronic-ﬁling

system to inform them of

activity on the docket.

NCA deﬁned:

FRAP 25(c)(5): (5)

Deﬁnition of “Notice of

Case Activity.” The term

“notice of case activity”

includes a notice of

docket activity, a notice

of electronic ﬁling, and

any other similar

electronic notice

provided to case

participants through the

court’s electronic-ﬁling

system to inform them of

activity on the docket.

NCA deﬁned:

Civil Rule 5(b)(4): (4)

Deﬁnition of “Notice of

Case Activity.” The term

“notice of case activity”

includes a notice of

docket activity, a notice

of electronic ﬁling, and

any other similar

electronic notice

provided to case

participants through the

court’s electronic-ﬁling

system to inform them of

activity on the docket.

NCA deﬁned:

Crim Rule 49(a)(5): (5)

Deﬁnition of “Notice of

Case Activity.” The term

“notice of case activity”

includes a notice of

docket activity, a notice

of electronic ﬁling, and

any other similar

electronic notice

provided to case

participants through the

court’s electronic-ﬁling

system to inform them of

activity on the docket.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 30 of 209

Certiﬁcate of service:

[NB: Rule 5005 doesn’t

discuss service, and

while Rule 9036

addresses service, it does

not address proof of

service.]

Certiﬁcate of service:

[NB: The overarching SRL

project does not give rise

to a need to revise Rule

8011(d)(1) (“Proof of

Service. Requirements”),

because it already uses

the language “if it was

served other than through

the court's electronicﬁling system,” thus

accommodating service

(by means of the notice of

case activity) of a ﬁling

made in paper form by a

SRL. However, based on

its review of bankruptcyspeciﬁc terminology, the

Bankruptcy Rules

Committee will update

Rule 8011(d)(1) to use the

terms “entity” and

“individual” instead of

“person.”]

Certiﬁcate of service:

[NB: No need to revise

FRAP 25(d)(1) (“Proof of

Service”), because it

already uses the

language “if it was served

other than through the

court's electronic-ﬁling

system,” thus

accommodating service

(by means of the notice of

case activity) of a ﬁling

made in paper form by a

SRL.]

Certiﬁcate of service:

Civil Rule 5(d)(1)(B): (B)

Certiﬁcate of Service.

No certiﬁcate of service

is required when a paper

is served through the

court’s electronic-ﬁling

system under Rule

5(b)(2). When a paper

that is required to be

served is served by other

means:

(i) if it is ﬁled, a certiﬁcate

of service must be ﬁled

with it or within a

reasonable time after

service; and

(ii) if it is not ﬁled, a

certiﬁcate of service

need not be ﬁled, unless

ﬁling is required by court

order or by local rule.

Certiﬁcate of service:

Criminal Rule 49(b)(1):

(b) Filing.

(1) When Required;

Certiﬁcate of Service.

Any paper that is required

to be served must be ﬁled

no later than a

reasonable time after

service. No certiﬁcate of

service is required when

a paper is served through

the court’s electronicﬁling system under Rule

49(a)(3). When a paper is

served by other means, a

certiﬁcate of service

must be ﬁled with it or

within a reasonable time

after service or ﬁling.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 31 of 209

OVERVIEW:

Proposals Relating to Privacy Rules in Public Court Filings

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 32 of 209

May 11, 2026 Report on the Privacy Rule Amendments

MEMORANDUM

To:

Judge James C. Dever III

Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure

From: Carolyn Dubay, Chief Counsel, Rules Committee Staff

Edward Hartnett, Standing Committee Reporter

Date: May 11, 2026

Re:

Report on Status of Privacy Rule Amendments

The Standing Committee is asked to approve for publication and public comment proposed

amendments to the privacy rules found in Civil Rule 5.2, Criminal Rule 49.1, and Bankruptcy Rule

9037. Redlined versions of the proposed amended rules are included following this memorandum.

These amendments reflect years of study and coordination, with the Criminal Rules Advisory

Committee taking the lead on these issues and the Bankruptcy Rules Advisory Committee

considering the special need for at least partially redacted taxpayer identification numbers in

bankruptcy proceedings. The proposed changes, which stem from suggestions received from

Senator Ron Wyden in 2022 and the Department of Justice in 2024, would do the following:

(1) Require complete redaction of social security numbers (SSNs), individual taxpayer

identification numbers (ITINs) and employer identification numbers (EINs) in civil and

criminal cases (Civil Rule 5.2 and Criminal Rule 49.1), subject to the existing exceptions

in those Rules. These changes would expand the privacy protections in these rules in two

ways. First, the current redaction requirement permits the inclusion of the last four digits

of these numbers; the proposed amendments would require complete redaction. Second,

EINs are not expressly covered by the existing rules, although redaction of EINs is required

in U.S. Tax Court and in the Court of Federal Claims. However, for reasons explained in

the Bankruptcy Rules Advisory Committee Report to the Standing Committee in January

2026, Bankruptcy Rule 9037 would not change with respect to social security numbers or

taxpayer identification numbers and would not expand to protect employer identification

numbers.

(2) Require the use of pseudonyms rather than initials to reference minors in court filings in

civil, criminal, and bankruptcy cases (Civil Rule 5.2, Criminal Rule 49.1, Bankruptcy Rule

9037). Note that the proposed amendments do not address the use of a pseudonym for a

minor in a court filing once the minor ages out, but public comment may provide insight

into whether this is an issue that should be addressed in a rule rather than through protective

orders in individual cases.

(3) In all three rule sets, clarify that the redaction/pseudonym requirement applies to all

documents in the court filing, including exhibits and attachments.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 33 of 209

May 11, 2026 Report on the Privacy Rule Amendments

As an additional matter, the Bankruptcy Rules Advisory Committee at its spring 2026

meeting voted to approve for publication and public amendments to Rule 8011 governing

bankruptcy appeals. Those proposed amendments would add an additional layer of privacy

protection in appeals from bankruptcy courts to district courts and bankruptcy appellate panels.

These proposed amendments were intended to mirror amendments that the Appellate Rules

Advisory Committee is considering with respect to Appellate Rule 25(a)(5). At its spring Advisory

Committee meeting, however, the Appellate Rules Committee determined that further study was

needed regarding those proposed amendments and it is not seeking publication at this time of

proposed amendments to Rule 25(a)(5). For this reason, we recommend that the Standing

Committee postpone publication and public comment on the proposed amendments to Bankruptcy

Rule 8011 to allow for coordination with the Appellate Rules Advisory Committee as it continues

to study the issue.

Importantly, the delay in moving forward with the appellate privacy rules (Bankruptcy Rule

8011 and Appellate Rule 25(a)(5)) should not delay publication for public comment of the

proposed amendments to Civil Rule 5.2, Criminal Rule 49.1, and Bankruptcy Rule 9037. Existing

Appellate Rule 25(a)(5) incorporates those Rules by reference, so any changes to those Rules will

apply on appeal without the need to amend Appellate Rule 25(a)(5). For reference, that Rule

provides:

Privacy Protection. An appeal in a case whose privacy protection was governed by Federal

Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9037, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2, or Federal Rule

of Criminal Procedure 49.1 is governed by the same rule on appeal. In all other

proceedings, privacy protection is governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2, except

that Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1 governs when an extraordinary writ is sought

in a criminal case. The provisions on remote electronic access in Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 5.2(c)(1) and (2) apply in a petition for review of a benefits decision of the

Railroad Retirement Board under the Railroad Retirement Act.

The amendments to Appellate Rule 25(a)(5) that the Advisory Committee on Appellate

Rules has been considering would add another layer of privacy protection on appeal, requiring

redactions in appellate filings even of material that need not be redacted under the Civil, Criminal,

and Bankruptcy Rules. It was poised to ask the Standing Committee to publish a proposal along

these lines but, at its April 2026 meeting, new concerns were raised about the breadth and impact

of that proposal. In particular, the U.S. Department of Justice (echoed by others) raised concerns

about the costs and difficulties involved in redacting the contents of an appendix. The possibility

that a party might forfeit this additional layer of protection was also raised. Recognizing that any

changes made to the Civil, Criminal, and Bankruptcy Rules will automatically flow through to the

courts of appeals, the Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules decided to study these concerns

further before seeking to impose another layer of protection, and it formed a subcommittee to do

so. Any changes it considers can also be shared with the Bankruptcy Rules Advisory Committee

regarding parallel amendments to Bankruptcy Rule 8011.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 34 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 35 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report of the Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules

COMMITTEE ON RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

OF THE

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20544

JAMES C. DEVER III

CHAIR

CHAIRS OF ADVISORY COMMITTEES

ALLISON H. EID

APPELLATE RULES

CAROLYN A. DUBAY

SECRETARY

REBECCA B. CONNELLY

BANKRUPTCY RULES

SARAH S. VANCE

CIVIL RULES

MICHAEL W. MOSMAN

CRIMINAL RULES

JESSE M. FURMAN

EVIDENCE RULES

MEMORANDUM

Hon. James C. Dever III, Chair

Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure

TO:

FROM: Hon. Allison H. Eid, Chair

Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules

RE:

Report of the Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules

DATE:

May 11, 2026

Introduction

The Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules met on Thursday, April 16, 2026,

in Charlotte, North Carolina. * * *

The Advisory Committee has several action items for the June 2026 meeting.

*****

In addition, the Advisory Committee asks the Standing Committee to publish

for public comment (per Part III of this report) proposed amendments to Rule 25, as

part of the cross-committee project to address electronic filing by self-represented litigants.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 36 of 209

Excerpt from the May 11, 2026 Report of the Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules

*****

III.

Item for Publication

Electronic Filing and Service by Self-Represented Parties (21AP-E)

The Advisory Committee defers to the Consultant to the Standing Committee

for the update regarding the joint project on electronic filing and service by self-represented litigants.

*****

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 37 of 209

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 1

Rule 25.

(a)

Filing and Service

Filing.

(1)

Filing with the Clerk. A paper required or

permitted to be filed in a court of appeals

must be filed with the clerk.

(2)

Filing: Method and Timeliness.

(A)

Nonelectronic Filing.

(i)

In General. For a paper not

filed electronically, filing may

be accomplished by mail

addressed to the clerk, but

filing is not timely unless the

clerk receives the papers

within the time fixed for

New material is underlined in red; matter to be omitted

is lined through.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 38 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

filing.

(ii)

A Brief or Appendix. A brief

appendix

not

filed

electronically is timely filed,

however, if on or before the

last day for filing, it is:

•

mailed to the clerk by

first-class mail, or other

class of mail that is at least

as expeditious, postage

prepaid; or

•

dispatched to a third-party

commercial

carrier

for

delivery

the

clerk

within 3 days.

Inmate

Filing.

institution

has

designed for legal mail, an

(iii)

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

system

Page 39 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

inmate confined there must

use that system to receive the

benefit

25(a)(2)(A)(iii). A paper not

filed electronically by an

inmate is timely if it is

deposited in the institution’s

internal mail system on or

before the last day for filing

and:

•

this

Rule

it is accompanied by: a

declaration in compliance

with 28 U.S.C. § 1746—

or a notarized statement—

setting out the date of

deposit and stating that

first-class postage is being

prepaid; or evidence (such

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 40 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

as a postmark or date

stamp) showing that the

paper was so deposited

and that postage was

prepaid; or

•

the

court

appeals

exercises its discretion to

permit the later filing of a

declaration or notarized

statement that satisfies

Rule 25(a)(2)(A)(iii).

(B)

Electronic Filing and Signing.

(i) By by a Represented Person

Represented

Generally Required; Exceptions. A

person represented by an attorney

must

nonelectronic filing is allowed by the

file

Counsel—

electronically,

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

unless

Page 41 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

court for good cause or is allowed or

required by local rule.

(ii)(C) Electronic

Filing

Unrepresented

When Allowed or Required.

(i)

Person

Party—

General.

unrepresented party person

not

attorney:

electronically only if allowed

by use the court’s electronic-

filing system to file papers

and receive notice of activity

in the party’s case, unless a

court order or by local rule

prohibits the party from doing

so.; and • An unrepresented

person may be required to file

represented

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

•

may

file

Page 42 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

electronically only by court

order in a case, or by a local

rule that includes reasonable

exceptions.

(ii)

Conditions and Restrictions

on Access. A court may set

and

conditions and restrictions on

unrepresented parties’ access

to the court’s electronic-filing

system (including by denying

or revoking access for a

particular

100

party). But the court may not

101

prohibit

102

parties from using the system

103

unless

104

includes

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

enforce

reasonable

unrepresented

all

that

unrepresented

prohibition

reasonable

Page 43 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

105

exceptions

106

permits the use of another

107

electronic method for filing

108

papers

109

electronic notice of activity in

110

the party’s case.

111

(iii)(D) Signing. A filing made through a

112

person’s electronic-filing account and

113

authorized by that person, together

114

with that person’s name on a

115

signature

116

person’s signature.

block,

the

and

court

receiving

constitutes

the

117

(iv)(E) Same as a Written Paper. A paper

118

filed electronically is a written paper

119

for purposes of these rules.

*****

120

121

122

(b)

Service of All Papers Required. Unless a rule

requires service by the clerk or the paper will be

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 44 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

123

served through the court’s electronic-filing system

124

under Rule 25(c)(1), a party must, at or before the

125

time of filing a paper, serve a copy on the other

126

parties to the appeal or review. Service on a party

127

represented by counsel must be made on the party’s

128

counsel.

129

130

(c)

Manner of Service.

(1)

Service by a Notice of Case Activity Sent

131

Through the Court’s Electronic-Filing

132

System. A notice of case activity sent to a

133

person registered to receive it through the

134

court’s electronic-filing system constitutes

135

service

136

qualifications:

137

(A)

that

person,

with

these

such service is not effective if the filer

138

learns that it did not reach the person

139

to be served; and

140

(B)

a court may provide by order or local

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 45 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

141

rule that if a paper is filed under seal

142

or initiates a proceeding in the court

143

of appeals under Rule 5, 6(c), 15, or

144

21, it must be served by other means.

145

146

147

148

(2)

Service by Other Means. A paper may also

be served under this rule by:

Nonelectronic service may be any of the following:

(A)

personal delivery, including delivery

149

to a responsible person at the office of

150

counsel;

151

(B)

by mail; or

152

(C)

by third-party commercial carrier for

153

delivery within 3 days; or

154

(D) . (2) Electronic service of a paper may be

155

made (A) by sending it to a registered

156

user by filing it with the court’s

157

electronic-filing system or (B) by

158

sending it by other electronic means

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 46 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

159

that the person to be served has

160

consented to in writing., but such

161

electronic service is not effective if

162

the sender learns that it did not reach

163

the person to be served.

164

(3)

Considerations in Choosing Other Means.

165

When reasonable considering such factors as

166

the immediacy of the relief sought, distance,

167

and cost, service on a party must be by a

168

manner at least as expeditious as the manner

169

used to file the paper with the court.

170

171

(4)

When Service Is Complete.

(A)

For Service by Mail or Commercial

172

Carrier. Service by mail or by

173

commercial carrier is complete on

174

mailing or delivery to the carrier.

175

176

(B)

For Service by a Notice of Case

Activity. For any service deadlines,

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 47 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

177

service by a notice of case activity is

178

complete as of the date of filing. For

179

any deadlines that run from the date

180

of service, service by a notice of case

181

activity is complete as of the notice’s

182

date.

183

184

Means. Service by other electronic

185

means is complete on filing or

186

sending, unless the party making

187

service is notified that the paper was

188

not received by the party served.

189

(5)

Definition of “Notice of Case Activity.”

190

The term “notice of case activity” includes a

191

notice of docket activity, a notice of

192

electronic filing, and any other similar

193

electronic

194

participants through the court’s electronic-

notice

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

provided

case

Page 48 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

195

filing system to inform them of activity on the

196

docket.

197

198

(d)

Proof of Service.

(1)

A paper presented for filing must contain

199

either of the following if it was served other

200

than through the court’s electronic-filing

201

system:

202

(A)

person served; or

203

204

an acknowledgment of service by the

(B)

proof of service consisting of a

205

statement by the person who made

206

service certifying:

207

(i)

service;

208

209

(ii)

212

the names of the persons

served; and

210

211

the date and manner of

(iii)

their

mail

electronic

addresses, facsimile numbers,

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 49 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

213

or the addresses of the places

214

of delivery, as appropriate for

215

the manner of service.

216

(2)

When a brief or appendix is filed by mailing

217

or dispatch in accordance with Rule

218

25(a)(2)(A)(ii), the proof of service must also

219

state the date and manner by which the

220

document was mailed or dispatched to the

221

clerk.

222

(3)

Proof of service may appear on or be affixed

223

to the papers filed.

224

*****

225

Committee Note

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

Rule 25 is amended to address two topics concerning

unrepresented parties. (Concurrent amendments are made to

Bankruptcy Rules 5005, 8011, and 9036, Civil Rule 5, and

Criminal Rule 49.) Rule 25(a)(2) is amended to expand the

availability of electronic modes by which unrepresented

parties can file documents with the court and receive notice

of filings that others make in the case. Rule 25(c) is amended

to address service of documents filed by an unrepresented

litigant in paper form. Because all such paper filings are

uploaded by court staff into the court’s electronic-filing

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 50 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

236

237

238

239

240

system, there is no need to require separate paper service by

the filer on case participants who receive an electronic notice

of the filing from the court’s electronic-filing system. Rule

25(c)’s treatment of service is also reorganized to reflect the

primacy of service by means of the electronic notice.

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

248

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

Subdivision (a)(2)(C). Under new Rule

25(a)(2)(C)(i), an unrepresented party is presumptively

authorized to use the court’s electronic-filing system to file

documents in the case. If a court of appeals wishes to restrict

unrepresented parties’ access to the electronic-filing system,

it must do so by order or local rule. This presumption in favor

of access by unrepresented parties is the opposite of the

presumption set by the prior Rule 25(a)(2)(B)(ii). The

reference to an unrepresented ‘party,’ rather than an

unrepresented ‘person,’ excludes an unrepresented nonparty

from its scope; the rule does not grant nonparty nonlawyers

any right to use the court’s e-filing system. However, the

court may not require electronic filing by any unrepresented

person, including any unrepresented nonparty, except by

order in a particular case or by a local rule that includes

reasonable exceptions.

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

New Rule 25(a)(2)(C)(ii) states that the court may set

reasonable conditions and restrictions on access by

unrepresented parties to the court’s electronic-filing system.

Where appropriate, access to the electronic-filing system

might be allowed only to a particular type of unrepresented

party: for example, one who is not incarcerated (if the

distinctive logistical considerations that apply in carceral

settings justify such a limitation), one who has satisfactorily

completed required training and certifications, one who

complies with other reasonable conditions on access, and so

on. Reasonable conditions or restrictions might also

distinguish between particular types of filings: for example,

filings that initiate a case in the court of appeals and those

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 51 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

270

271

272

273

274

that do not. The subdivision explicitly contemplates that, in

appropriate circumstances, a reasonable restriction might

also include an order barring a specific unrepresented party

from accessing the court’s electronic-filing system or

revoking that party’s access to the system.

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

282

283

284

285

286

287

288

289

However, new Rule 25(a)(2)(C)(ii) also expressly

prohibits a court from barring all unrepresented parties from

using the electronic-filing system, unless the court also

either (1) includes reasonable exceptions to the prohibition,

or (2) permits unrepresented parties to use another electronic

method for filing documents (such as by email or by upload

through an electronic document submission system) and for

receiving notice of court filings and orders (such as an

electronic noticing program). A local provision requiring

unrepresented parties to obtain the court’s permission in

order to use the court’s electronic-filing system would count

as including reasonable exceptions, so long as such

permission is granted or withheld in accordance with the

reasonable conditions and restrictions on access set by the

court.

290

291

Former Rules 25(a)(2)(B)(iii) and (iv) are carried

forward but renumbered as Rules 25(a)(2)(D) and (E).

292

293

294

295

296

297

298

299

300

301

302

Subdivision (b). Former Rule 25(b) generally

required that a party, “at or before the time of filing a paper,

[must] serve a copy on the other parties to the appeal or

review.” The former rule exempted from this requirement

instances when “a rule requires service by the clerk.” The

rule is amended to add a second exemption, for instances

when “the paper will be served through the court’s

electronic-filing system under Rule 25(c)(1).” This

amendment reflects that new Rule 25(c)(1) encompasses

service by the notice of case activity that results from the

clerk’s uploading into the system a paper filing by an

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 52 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

303

304

unrepresented litigant. (As to when such service is complete,

see subdivision (c)(4)(B).)

305

306

307

308

309

310

311

312

313

Subdivision (c). Rule 25(c) is restructured so that the

primary means of service – that is, service by means of the

court’s electronic-filing system – is addressed first, in Rule

25(c)(1). Former Rule 25(c)(1) becomes new Rule 25(c)(2),

which continues to address alternative means of service.

New Rule 25(c)(5) defines the term “notice of case activity”

as any electronic notice provided to case participants through

the court’s electronic-filing system to inform them of a filing

or other activity on the docket.

314

315

316

317

318

319

320

321

322

323

324

325

326

327

328

329

330

Subdivision (c)(1). Amended Rule 25(c)(1)

eliminates the requirement of separate (paper) service on a

litigant who is registered to receive a notice of case activity

from the court’s electronic-filing system. Litigants who are

registered to receive a notice of case activity include those

litigants who are participating in the court’s electronic-filing

system with respect to the case in question and also include

those litigants who receive the notice because they have

registered for a court-based electronic-noticing program.

(Former Rule 25(c)(2)’s provision for service by “sending [a

paper] to a registered user by filing it with the court’s

electronic-filing system” had already eliminated the

requirement of paper service on registered users of the

court’s electronic-filing system by other registered users of

the system; the amendment extends this exemption from

paper service to those who file by a means other than through

the court’s electronic-filing system.)

331

332

333

334

335

New Rule 25(c)(1)(A) provides that service by

means of the court’s electronic-filing system is not effective

if the filer learns that it did not reach the person to be served.

This provision carries forward the principle previously

contained in former Rule 25(c)(4).

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 53 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

336

337

338

339

340

341

342

343

344

345

346

347

348

349

350

351

New Rule 25(c)(1)(B) states that a court may provide

by order or local rule that if a paper is filed under seal or

initiates a proceeding in the court of appeals under Rule 5,

6(c), 15, or 21, it must be served by other means. This

sentence is designed to account for circuits (if any) in which

parties in the case cannot access other participants’ sealed

filings via the court’s electronic-filing system. It also

accounts for circuits that permit the use of the court’s

electronic-filing system to file case-initiating petitions but

that do not wish to permit the filer to rely on the court’s

electronic-filing system for service of such a petition. The

rule does not set a national requirement that all caseinitiating documents be served other than through the court’s

electronic-filing system; a court of appeals may decide that,

in some instances, service of such documents through the

court’s electronic-filing system is an appropriate option.

352

353

354

Subdivision (c)(2). Subdivision (c)(2) carries

forward the contents of former Rule 25(c)(1), with three

changes.

355

356

357

358

359

360

361

362

363

364

365

366

The

subdivision’s

introductory

phrase

(“Nonelectronic service may be any of the following”) is

amended to read “A paper may also be served under this rule

by.” This locution reflects the inclusion of other electronic

means (apart from service through the court’s electronicfiling system) in new Rule 25(c)(2)(D) and also ensures that

new Rule 25(c)(2) remains an option for serving any litigant,

even one who receives notices of filing. This option might

be useful to litigants who will be filing non-electronically

but who wish to effect service on their opponents before the

time when the court will have uploaded the filing into the

court’s system (thus generating the notice of case activity).

367

368

The prior reference to “sending [a paper] to a

registered user by filing it with the court’s electronic-filing

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 54 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

369

370

system” is deleted, because this is now covered by new Rule

25(c)(1).

371

372

373

374

The concept that service by other electronic means is

not effective if the sender learns that the document was not

received by the person served – previously contained in prior

Rule 25(c)(4) – is relocated to what now is Rule 25(c)(2)(D).

375

376

377

378

379

380

Subdivision (c)(4). Amended subdivision (c)(4)

carries forward the prior rule’s provisions that service by

electronic means other than through the court’s electronicfiling system is complete on sending and that service by mail

or by commercial carrier is complete on mailing or delivery

to the carrier.

381

382

383

384

385

386

387

388

389

390

391

392

393

As to service through the court’s electronic-filing

system, the amended rule provides that service by a notice

of case activity is complete as of the date of filing for

purposes of any deadlines for making service. But the

amended rule provides that, for purposes of any deadlines

that run from the date of service, service is complete as of

the date of the notice of case activity. Thus, the amended rule

ensures that if there is a delay between the date the court

receives a filing not made through the electronic-filing

system and the date the court uploads that filing into the

electronic-filing system, that delay will not diminish the time

allowed to the party whose deadline runs from the date of

service.

394

395

396

397

398

399

400

In addition to providing when service was complete,

former Rule 25(c)(4) addressed what happened if the person

making electronic service learned that the document was not

received by the person to be served. The latter is now

addressed by new Rules 25(c)(1)(A) and (c)(2)(D), which

provide that electronic service is not effective if the filer or

sender learns that it did not reach the person to be served.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 55 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

401

402

403

404

405

406

407

408

409

410

Subdivision (c)(5). New Rule 25(c)(5) defines the

term “notice of case activity” as any electronic notice

provided to case participants through the court’s electronicfiling system to inform them of a filing or other activity on

the docket. There are two equivalent terms currently in use:

Notice of Electronic Filing and Notice of Docket Activity.

“Notice of case activity” is intended to encompass both of

those terms, as well as any equivalent terms that may come

into use in future. The word “electronic” is deleted as

superfluous now that electronic filing is the default method.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 56 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 57 of 209

Excerpt from the May 7, 2026 Report of the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules

COMMITTEE ON RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

OF THE

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20544

JAMES C. DEVER III

CHAIR

CHAIRS OF ADVISORY COMMITTEES

ALLISON H. EID

APPELLATE RULES

CAROLYN A. DUBAY

SECRETARY

REBECCA B. CONNELLY

BANKRUPTCY RULES

SARAH S. VANCE

CIVIL RULES

MICHAEL W. MOSMAN

CRIMINAL RULES

JESSE M. FURMAN

EVIDENCE RULES

MEMORANDUM

TO:

Hon. James C. Dever III, Chair

Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure

FROM:

Hon. Rebecca B. Connelly, Chair

Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules

RE:

Report of the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules

DATE:

May 7, 2026

***

Introduction

The Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules met in Charlotte, N.C., on April 15, 2026.

*****

In addition to the rules discussed in Professor Struve’s report on electronic filing and

service by self-represented litigants, the Advisory Committee also agreed to seek publication for

comment of proposed amendments to Bankruptcy Rules 2003 (Meeting of Creditors or Equity

Security Holders) and 9037 (Privacy Protection for Filings Made With the Court).

Part II of this report presents those action items. They are organized as follows:

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 58 of 209

Excerpt from the May 7, 2026 Report of the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules

*****

II.

Items for Publication

●

Rule 2003; and

●

Rule 9037.

Action Items

*****

Items for Publication

The Advisory Committee recommends that the following rule amendments be

published for public comment in August 2026. Bankruptcy Tab 17 includes Rule 2003, and Rule

9037 is included in Ms. Dubay’s report on the privacy rules amendments.

Action Item 4. Rule 2003 (Meeting of Creditors or Equity Security Holders). A chapter

12/chapter 13 trustee submitted a suggestion (Suggestion 24-BK-G), which she later revised

(Suggestion 25-BK-B), to amend Rule 2003 as pertains to the timing and location of meetings of

creditors. She made this suggestion, which was endorsed by the Association of Chapter 12 Trustees

(“ACT12”) and the National Association of Chapter 13 Trustees, in response to the current practice

of conducting the meetings remotely by means of Zoom. The National Association of Bankruptcy

Trustees (“NABT”) also submitted a suggestion (25-BK-C) to amend Rule 2003 to take account

of remote meetings of creditors.

Because some of the concerns raised by the suggestions relate to policies of the Executive

Office for U.S. Trustees (“EOUST”), the Advisory Committee suggested that discussions between

that office and trustee representatives might be helpful in determining whether a consensus could

be reached about the need for possible amendments to Rule 2003. Those discussions took place,

and ACT 12 and NABT submitted new suggestions (26-BK-1 and 26-BK-2) that proposed

amendments to Rule 2003(a) that the EOUST and the trustee groups agreed on, plus an additional

amendment that the EOUST did not support.

The Advisory Committee approved the proposed amendments for publication, with minor

changes suggested by the style consultants, and by a 10-4 vote rejected the language to which the

EOUST objected. These proposed amendments would allow more time to convene the meeting of

creditors in chapter 12 and 13 cases, extending the deadline in chapter 12 cases from 35 to 60 days,

and in chapter 13 cases, from 50 to 60 days, after the order for relief. They would also expressly

authorize meetings of creditors to be “conducted in person or remotely” and would allow the U.S.

trustee to designate in which manner a meeting would be conducted. The Advisory Committee

declined to add the sentence, “A remote meeting is deemed to take place in the district in which

the case was filed.”

Action Item 5. Rule 9037 (Protecting Privacy for Filings). All the advisory committees

have been considering suggestions that address particular issues relating to the privacy rules,

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 59 of 209

Excerpt from the May 7, 2026 Report of the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules

including suggestions regarding redaction of social-security numbers (“SSNs”) in federal-court

filings and a suggestion relating to initials of known minors in court filings. The Advisory

Committee has approved for publication amendments to Rule 9037 that would extend the

protection of the rule to exhibits and attachments and would require the use of a pseudonym in

place of initials for an individual known to be and identified as a minor. It does not propose

amending the rule to require the complete redaction of SSNs. A Federal Judicial Center survey of

bankruptcy debtor attorneys; chapter 7, 12, and 13 trustees; creditor attorneys; various tax

authorities; and representatives of the National Association of Attorneys General revealed a need

for the last 4 SSN digits in order to associate filings with the correct individual. The Advisory

Committee also decided not to require the redaction of EINs, which the bankruptcy petition forms

currently require an employer-debtor to provide. These numbers are used to monitor repeat filings,

and the Advisory Committee was unaware of any demonstrated need for redacting them.

The Advisory Committee has also approved for publication a new Rule 8011(a)(4) that

would require full redaction of SSNs or other taxpayer-identification numbers—including EINs—

from any filing made in appeals from the bankruptcy court to the district court or bankruptcy

appellate panel. These amendments were drafted to parallel amendments to Appellate Rule 25,

which the Appellate Rules Advisory Committee has been considering. However, in light of that

committee’s continuing consideration of those amendments, the Advisory Committee

recommends that the Standing Committee postpone publication of the new Rule 8011(a)(4) to

allow for coordination with the Appellate Rules Advisory Committee as it continues to study the

issue.

*****

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 60 of 209

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL

RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE 1

Rule 2003. Meeting of Creditors or Equity

Security Holders

(a)

Date and Place of the Meeting.

(1)

Date. Except as provided in § 341(e), the

United States trustee must call a meeting of

creditors to be held:

(A)

in a Chapter 7 or 11 case, no fewer

than 21 days and no more than 40

days after the order for relief; or

(B)

in a Chapter 12 or 13 case, no fewer

than 21 days and no more than 35 60

days after the order for relief; or

(C)

in a Chapter 13 case, no fewer than

21 days and no more than 50 days

after the order for relief.

New material is underlined in red; matter to be omitted is

lined through.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 61 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

(2)

Effect of a Motion or an Appeal.

The

United States trustee may set a later date for

the meeting if there is a motion to vacate the

order for relief, an appeal from such an

order, or a motion to dismiss the case.

(3)

Place; Manner of Conducting Possible

Change in the Meeting Date. The meeting

may be held at a regular place for holding

court place and in the manner designated by

the United States trustee. Or the United

States trustee may designate any other place

in the district The meeting may be conducted

in person or remotely. An in-person meeting

may be held at a regular place for holding

court, or at any place in the district

designated by the United States trustee that

is convenient for the parties in interest. If the

designated meeting place is not regularly

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 62 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

staffed by the United States trustee or an

assistant who may preside, the meeting may

be held no more than 60 days after the order

for relief.

*****

Committee Note

Subdivision (a) is amended to better reflect current

practices in the conduct of meetings of creditors.

In paragraph (1) the time for convening the meeting

of creditors in a chapter 12 or 13 case is extended to a

maximum of 60 days after the order for relief. Prior to the

amendment, meetings were frequently called for a date that

was as many as 60 days after the order for relief under a

provision in paragraph (3) that allowed such lengthening of

the timeframe when “the designated meeting place [was]

not regularly staffed by the United States trustee or an

assistant who [could] preside.” Now that provision has been

deleted, and the rule allows the U.S. trustee to call for a

meeting of creditors in any chapter 12 or 13 case to be held

no fewer than 21 days and no more than 60 days after the

order for relief.

Paragraph (3) is amended to clarify that, consistent

with § 341(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, meetings of creditors

may be held remotely, as well as in person, as designated

by the U.S. trustee.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 63 of 209

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE1

Rule 5005. Filing Papers and Sending Copies to

the United States Trustee

(a)

Filing Papers.

*****

(3)

Electronic Filing and Signing.

(A)

By a Represented Entity—Generally

Required; Exceptions. An entity

represented by an attorney must file

electronically, unless nonelectronic

filing is allowed by the court for cause

or is allowed or required by local rule.

(B)

By an Unrepresented Individual—

When Allowed or Required.

(i)

In General. An unrepresented

individual not represented by

New material is underlined in red; matter to be omitted

is lined through.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 64 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

an attorney: (i) may file

electronically only if allowed

by use the court’s electronic-

filing system to file papers

and receive notice of activity

in the case, unless a court

order or local rule; and

prohibits the individual from

doing so. An unrepresented

individual

required to file electronically

only by court order in a case,

or by a local rule that includes

reasonable exceptions.

(ii)

may

Conditions and Restrictions

on Access. A court may set

and

conditions and restrictions on

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

enforce

reasonable

Page 65 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

unrepresented

access

electronic-filing

(including by denying or

revoking

particular

individual). But the court may

not prohibit all unrepresented

individuals from using the

system unless that prohibition

includes

exceptions

permits the use of another

electronic method for filing

papers

electronic notice of activity in

the case.

(C)

individuals’

the

court’s

system

access

for

unrepresented

reasonable

and

the

court

receiving

Signing. A filing made through a

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 66 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

person’s an individual’s electronic-

filing account and authorized by that

person individual, together with the

person’s individual’s name on a

signature

person’s individual’s signature.

(D)

block,

constitutes

the

Same as a Written Paper. A paper

filed electronically is a written paper

for purposes of these rules, the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

made applicable by these rules, and

§ 107.

(b)

Sending Copies to the United States Trustee.

(1)

Papers Sent Electronically. All papers

required to be sent to the United States trustee

may be sent by using the court’s electronic-

filing system in accordance with Rule 9036,

unless a court order or local rule provides

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 67 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

otherwise.

(2)

Papers Not Sent Electronically. If an entity

other than the clerk sends a paper to the

United States trustee without using the

court’s electronic-filing system, the entity

must promptly file a statement identifying the

paper and stating the manner by which and

the date it was sent. The clerk need not send

a copy of a paper to a United States trustee

who requests in writing that it not be sent.

(c)

When a Paper Is Erroneously Filed or Delivered.

(1)

Paper Intended for the Clerk. If a paper

intended to be filed with the clerk is

erroneously delivered to a person an entity

listed below, that person entity must note on

it the date of receipt and promptly send it to

the clerk:



the United States trustee;

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 68 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE



the trustee;



the trustee’s attorney;



a bankruptcy judge;



a district judge;



the clerk of the bankruptcy appellate

panel; or



(2)

the clerk of the district court.

Paper Intended for the United States

Trustee. If a paper intended for the United

States trustee is erroneously delivered to the

clerk or to another person entity listed in (1),

the clerk or that person entity must note on it

100

the date of receipt and promptly send it to the

101

United States trustee.

102

(3)

Applicable Filing Date. In the interests of

103

justice, the court may order that the original

104

receipt date shown on a paper erroneously

105

delivered under (1) or (2) be deemed the date

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 69 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

106

it was filed with the clerk or sent to the United

107

States trustee.

108

Committee Note

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

Rule 5005(a)(3)(B) is amended to address electronic

filing by unrepresented individuals. (Concurrent

amendments are made to Rules 8011 and 9036 and to Civil

Rule 5, Criminal Rule 49, and Appellate Rule 25.) The

amendments expand the availability of electronic modes by

which unrepresented individuals can file documents with the

court and receive notice of filings that others make in the

case. The amendments also conform to the terminology used

elsewhere in the Bankruptcy Rules by replacing “person”

with “entity” (when the intent is to encompass the broadest

possible range of actors) or with “individual” (when the

intent is to refer to a human being).

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

Under amended Rule 5005(a)(3)(B)(i), the

presumption is the opposite of the presumption set by the

prior rule. That is, under the amended rule, unrepresented

individuals are presumptively authorized to use the court’s

electronic-filing system to file documents in their case. If a

court wishes to restrict unrepresented individuals’ access to

the court’s electronic-filing system, it must adopt an order or

local rule to impose that restriction.

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

Amended Rule 5005(a)(3)(B)(ii) states that the court

may set reasonable conditions and restrictions on access by

unrepresented individuals to the court’s electronic-filing

system. For example, access to electronic filing could be

allowed only to unrepresented individuals who are not

incarcerated (in light of the distinctive logistical

considerations that apply in carceral settings), satisfactorily

complete required training and certifications, and comply

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 70 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

137

with other reasonable conditions on access.

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

Amended Rule 5005(a)(3)(B)(ii) expressly states

that a reasonable restriction would include, where

appropriate, orders barring a specific unrepresented

individual from accessing the court’s electronic-filing

system or revoking a specific unrepresented individual’s

access to the court’s electronic-filing system. Another

example would be a local provision stating that certain types

of filings cannot be filed by means of the court’s electronicfiling system.

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

However, amended Rule 5005(a)(3)(B)(ii) also

expressly prohibits a court from barring all unrepresented

individuals from using the court’s electronic-filing system,

unless the court also either (1) includes reasonable

exceptions to the prohibition, or (2) permits unrepresented

individuals to use another electronic method for filing

documents (such as by email or by upload through an

electronic document submission system) and an alternative

electronic means for receiving notice of court filings and

orders (such as an electronic noticing program). For

example, local provisions that require unrepresented

individuals who seek to use the court’s electronic-filing

system to obtain the court’s permission would count as

including reasonable exceptions, so long as such permission

is granted or withheld in accordance with the reasonable

conditions and restrictions on access set by the court.

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

Rule 5005(a)(3)(C) is amended to reflect that courts’

electronic-filing accounts are held by individuals and not by

persons, as defined by § 101(41) of the Code. References to

a “person” in Rules 5005(c)(1) and (2) are replaced by

references to an “entity”; under § 101(15) of the Code

“entity” is a broader term than “person” and the amendment

ensures that the chosen term encompasses all of the listed

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 71 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

170

types of recipients.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 72 of 209

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE1

Rule 8011. Filing and Service; Signature

(a)

Filing.

(1)

With the Clerk. A document required or

permitted to be filed in a district court or BAP

must be filed with the clerk of that court.

(2)

Method and Timeliness.

(A)

Nonelectronic Filing.

*****

(B)

Electronic

Filing.(i)

Represented

Person

Generally Required; Exceptions. An

entity represented by an attorney must

file

nonelectronic filing is allowed by the

electronically,

Entity—

unless

New material is underlined in red; matter to be omitted

is lined through.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 73 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

court for cause or is allowed or

required by local rule.

(ii)(C) Electronic

Filing

Unrepresented

When Allowed or Required.

(i)

Individual—

General.

unrepresented

individual

represented

attorney:

•

electronically only if

allowed by use the

court’s

filing system to file

documents

and

receive

activity in the case,

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

not

may

file

electronic-

notice

Page 74 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

unless a court order or

by local rule prohibits

the individual from

doing so.; and An

unrepresented

individual

• may be required to

file electronically only

by court order in a

case, or by a local rule

that

reasonable exceptions.

Conditions

and

Restrictions

Access. A court may

set

reasonable conditions

and

(ii)

includes

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

and

enforce

restrictions

Page 75 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

unrepresented

individuals’ access to

the court’s electronic-

filing

(including by denying

or revoking access for

unrepresented

individual). But the

court may not prohibit

all

individuals from using

the system unless that

prohibition

reasonable exceptions

or the court permits

the use of another

electronic method for

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

system

particular

unrepresented

includes

Page 76 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

filing documents and

receiving

notice of activity in

the case.

electronic

(iii)(D) Electronically Filed Same as a

Written Paper. A document filed

electronically is a written paper for

purposes of these rules.

(C)(E) When Paper Copies Are Required.

No paper copies are required when a

document is filed electronically. If a

document is filed by mail or by

delivery to the district court or BAP,

no additional copies are required. But

the district court or BAP may, by

local rule or order in a particular case,

require that a specific number of

paper copies be filed or furnished.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 77 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

(3)

Clerk’s Refusal of Documents. The court

clerk must not refuse to accept for filing any

document solely because it is not presented in

proper form as required by these rules or by

any local rule or practice.

(b)

Service of All Documents Required. Unless a rule

requires service by the clerk or the document will be

served through the court’s electronic-filing system

under (c)(1), a party must, at or before the time of the

filing of a document, serve it on the other parties to

the appeal. Service on a party represented by counsel

must be made on the party’s counsel.

100

(c)

Manner of Service.

(1)

Service by a Notice of Case Activity Sent

101

Through the Court’s Electronic-Filing

102

System. A notice of case activity sent to an

103

entity registered to receive it through the

104

court’s electronic-filing system constitutes

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 78 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

105

service

106

qualifications:

107

(A)

that

entity,

with

these

such service is not effective if the filer

108

learns that it did not reach the entity

109

to be served; and

(B)

110

a court may provide by order or local

111

rule that if a document is filed under

112

seal, it must be served by other

113

means.

114

(1)(2) Nonelectronic Service by Other Means.

115

Nonelectronic service A document may also

116

be served under this rule by any of the

117

following:

118

(A)

personal delivery;

119

(B)

mail; or

120

(C)

third-party commercial carrier for

delivery within 3 days.; or

121

122

(2)

Service By Electronic Means. Electronic

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 79 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

123

service may be made by:

124

(A)

sending a document to a registered

125

user by filing it with the court’s

126

electronic-filing system; or

(B)

127

using other (D) electronic means that

128

the

129

consented to in writing, but such

130

electronic service is not effective if

131

the sender learns that it did not reach

132

the entity to be served.

133

134

(3)

person

entity

served

has

When Service Is Complete.

(A)

For Service by a Notice of Case

135

Activity. For any service deadlines,

136

service by a notice of case activity is

137

complete as of the date of filing. For

138

any deadlines that run from the date

139

of service, service by a notice of case

140

activity is complete as of the notice’s

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 80 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

date.

141

(B)

142

For Service by Other Electronic

143

Means. Service by other electronic

144

means is complete on sending.

(C)

145

For Service by Mail or Commercial

146

Carrier. Service by mail or by third-

147

party commercial carrier is complete

148

on mailing or delivery to the carrier.

149

Service by electronic means is

150

complete on filing or sending, unless

151

the person making service receives

152

notice that the document was not

153

received by the person served.

154

(4)

Definition of “Notice of Case Activity.” The

155

term “notice of case activity” includes a

156

notice of docket activity, a notice of

157

electronic filing, and any other similar

158

electronic

notice

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

provided

case

Page 81 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

159

participants through the court’s electronic-

160

filing system to inform them of activity on the

161

docket.

162

163

(d)

Proof of Service.

(1)

Requirements. A document presented for

164

filing must contain either of the following if

165

it was served other than through the court’s

166

electronic-filing system:

167

(A)

the person entity served; or

168

169

an acknowledgement of service by

(B)

proof of service consisting of a

170

statement by the person individual

171

who made service certifying:

172

(i)

service;

173

174

(ii)

the names of the persons

entities served; and

175

176

the date and manner of

(iii)

the mail or electronic address,

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 82 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

177

the fax number, or the address

178

of the place of delivery—as

179

appropriate for the manner of

180

service—for

181

entity served.

(2)

182

each

person

Delayed Proof of Service. A district

183

or BAP clerk may accept a document

184

for

185

acknowledgement or proof of service,

186

but must require the acknowledgment

187

or proof of service to be filed

188

promptly thereafter.

(3)

189

filing

without

For a Brief or Appendix. When a

190

brief or appendix is filed, the proof of

191

service must also state the date and

192

manner by which it was filed.

193

194

(e)

Signature Always Required.

(1)

Electronic Filing. Every document filed

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 83 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

195

electronically must include the electronic

196

signature of the person individual filing it or,

197

if the person an entity is represented, the

198

counsel’s electronic signature. A filing made

199

through a person’s an individual’s electronic-

200

filing account and authorized by that

201

person—individual—together

202

person’s individual’s name on a signature

203

block—constitutes the person’s individual’s

204

signature.

205

(2)

with

that

Paper Filing. Every document filed in paper

206

form must be signed by the person individual

207

filing it or, if the person an entity is

208

represented, by the person’s entity’s counsel.

209

Committee Note

210

211

212

213

214

215

Rule 8011 is amended to address two topics

concerning

self-represented

litigants.

(Concurrent

amendments are made to Rules 5005 and 9036 and to Civil

Rule 5, Criminal Rule 49, and Appellate Rule 25.) Rule

8011(a) is amended to expand the availability of electronic

modes by which unrepresented individuals can file

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 84 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

227

228

229

230

documents with the court and receive notice of filings that

others make in the case. Rule 8011(c) is amended to address

service of documents filed by an unrepresented individual in

paper form. Because all such paper filings are uploaded by

court staff into the court’s electronic-filing system, there is

no need to require separate paper service by the filer on case

participants who receive an electronic notice of the filing

from the court’s electronic-filing system. Rule 8011(c)’s

treatment of service is also reorganized to reflect the primacy

of service by means of the electronic notice. The

amendments also conform to the terminology used

elsewhere in the Bankruptcy Rules by replacing “person”

with “entity” (when the intent is to encompass the broadest

possible range of actors) or with “individual” (when the

intent is to refer to a human being).

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

238

239

Subdivision (a)(2)(C). Under new Rule

8011(a)(2)(C)(i), the presumption is the opposite of the

presumption set by the prior Rule 8011(a)(2)(B)(ii). That is,

under new Rule 8011(a)(2)(C)(i), unrepresented individuals

are presumptively authorized to use the court’s electronicfiling system to file documents in their case. If a district court

or BAP wishes to restrict unrepresented individuals’ access

to the court’s electronic-filing system, it must adopt an order

or local rule to impose that restriction.

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

248

New Rule 8011(a)(2)(C)(ii) states that the court may

set reasonable conditions and restrictions on access by

unrepresented individuals to the court’s electronic-filing

system. For example, access to electronic filing could be

allowed only to unrepresented individuals who are not

incarcerated (in light of the distinctive logistical

considerations that apply in carceral settings), satisfactorily

complete required training and certifications, and comply

with other reasonable conditions on access.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 85 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

New Rule 8011(a)(2)(C)(ii) expressly states that a

reasonable restriction would include, where appropriate,

orders barring a specific unrepresented individual from

accessing the court’s electronic-filing system or revoking a

specific unrepresented individual’s access to the court’s

electronic-filing system. Another example would be a local

provision stating that certain types of filings cannot be filed

by means of the court’s electronic-filing system.

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

271

272

However, new Rule 8011(a)(2)(C)(ii) also expressly

prohibits a court from barring all unrepresented individuals

from using the court’s electronic-filing system, unless the

court also either (1) includes reasonable exceptions to the

prohibition, or (2) permits unrepresented individuals to use

another electronic method for filing documents (such as by

email or by upload through an electronic document

submission system) and an alternative electronic means for

receiving notice of court filings and orders (such as an

electronic noticing program). For example, local provisions

that require unrepresented individuals who seek to use the

court’s electronic-filing system to obtain the court’s

permission would count as including reasonable exceptions,

so long as such permission is granted or withheld in

accordance with the reasonable conditions and restrictions

on access set by the court.

273

274

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

282

Subdivision (b). Prior Rule 8011(b) generally

required that a party, “at or before the time of filing a

document, [must] serve it on the other parties to the appeal.”

The rule exempted from this requirement instances when “a

rule requires service by the clerk.” The rule is amended to

add a second exemption, for instances when “the document

will be served through the court’s electronic-filing system

under (c)(1).” This amendment reflects that new Rule

8011(c)(1) encompasses service by the notice of case

activity that results from the clerk’s uploading into the

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 86 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

283

284

system a paper filing by an unrepresented individual. (As to

when such service is complete, see subdivision (c)(3)(A).)

285

286

287

288

289

290

291

292

293

Subdivision (c). Rule 8011(c) is restructured so that

the primary means of service—that is, service by means of

the court’s electronic-filing system—is addressed first, in

subdivision (c)(1). Prior Rule 8011(c)(1) is now Rule

8011(c)(2), which continues to address alternative means of

service. New Rule 8011(c)(4) defines the term “notice of

case activity” as any electronic notice provided to case

participants through the court’s electronic-filing system to

inform them of a filing or other activity on the docket.

294

295

296

297

298

299

300

301

302

303

304

305

306

307

308

309

310

Subdivision (c)(1). Amended Rule 8011(c)(1)

eliminates the requirement of separate (paper) service on a

litigant who is registered to receive a notice of case activity

from the court’s electronic-filing system. Litigants who are

registered to receive a notice of case activity include those

litigants who are participating in the court’s electronic-filing

system with respect to the case in question and also include

those litigants who receive the notice because they have

registered for a court-based electronic-noticing program.

(Prior Rule 8011(c)(2)(A)’s provision for service by

“sending a document to a registered user by filing it with the

court’s electronic-filing system” had already eliminated the

requirement of paper service on registered users of the

court’s electronic-filing system by other registered users of

the system; the amendment extends this exemption from

paper service to those who file by a means other than through

the court’s electronic-filing system.)

311

312

313

314

315

New Rule 8011(c)(1)(A) provides that service by

means of the court’s electronic-filing system is not effective

if the filer learns that it did not reach the person to be served.

This provision carries forward the principle previously

contained in prior Rule 8011(c)(3). Prior Rule 8011(c)(3)

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 87 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

316

317

318

319

320

321

322

323

324

325

326

327

328

stated that “Service by electronic means is complete on filing

or sending, unless the person making service receives notice

that the document was not received by the person served.”

By contrast, the parallel provisions in current Civil Rule 5

and Criminal Rule 49 use “learns” instead of “receives

notice.” In drafting the 2018 amendments to Rules 8011 and

9036, the Bankruptcy Rules Committee had chosen

“receives notice” in order to prevent litigants from purposely

ignoring notice to avoid learning that the document was not

received. However, the term “learns” is the broader term and

it encompasses “receiving notice.” Thus, the amended Rules

8011 and 9036 use “learns” in conformity with the other sets

of rules.

329

330

331

332

333

334

New Rule 8011(c)(1)(B) states that a court may

provide by order or local rule that if a paper is filed under

seal, it must be served by other means. This sentence is

designed to account for districts or BAPs in which parties in

the case cannot access other participants’ sealed filings via

the court’s electronic-filing system.

335

336

337

Subdivision (c)(2). Subdivision (c)(2) carries

forward the contents of prior Rules 8011(c)(1) and (2), with

three changes.

338

339

340

341

342

343

344

345

346

347

The

subdivision’s

introductory

phrase

(“Nonelectronic service may be by any of the following”) is

amended to read “A document may also be served under this

rule by.” This locution ensures that what will become Rule

8011(c)(2) remains an option for serving any litigant, even

one who receives notices of filing. This option might be

useful to a litigant who will be filing non-electronically but

who wishes to effect service on their opponent before the

time when the court will have uploaded the filing into the

court’s system (thus generating the notice of case activity).

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 88 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

348

349

350

351

Prior Rule 8011(c)(2)(A)’s reference to “sending a

document to a registered user by filing it with the court’s

electronic-filing system” is deleted, because this is now

covered by new Rule 8011(c)(1).

352

353

354

355

356

357

358

The concept that service by other electronic means is

not effective if the sender learns that the document was not

received by the person served—previously contained in

prior Rule 8011(c)(3)—is relocated to what now is Rule

8011(c)(2)(D). As noted above with respect to subdivision

(c)(1), the amended rule in subdivision (c)(2)(D) uses

“learns” instead of the prior rule’s “receives notice.”

359

360

361

362

363

Subdivision (c)(3). Rule 8011(c)(3) (“When Service

is Complete”) is amended to distinguish between service

under new Rule 8011(c)(1)—that is, service by means of the

notice of case activity—and service by “other electronic

means.”

364

365

366

367

368

369

370

371

372

373

374

375

376

377

378

379

380

When a litigant files a paper other than through the

court’s electronic-filing system, service on a litigant who is

registered to receive a notice of case activity through the

court’s electronic-filing system occurs by means of the

notice of case activity. But when the filing is made other than

through the court’s electronic-filing system, there can be a

short time lag between the date the litigant files the

document with the court and the date that the clerk’s office

uploads it into the court’s electronic-filing system. Thus,

new subdivision (c)(3)(A) provides that, for purposes of any

deadlines for making service, service by a notice of case

activity is complete as of the date of filing. But the amended

rule provides that, for purposes of any deadlines that run

from the date of service, service is complete as of the date of

the notice of case activity. Thus, the amended rule ensures

that if there is a delay between the date the court receives a

filing not made through the electronic-filing system and the

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 89 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

381

382

383

date the court uploads that filing into the electronic-filing

system, that delay will not diminish the time allowed to the

party whose deadline runs from the date of service.

384

385

Under subdivision (c)(3)(B), service by other

electronic means continues to be complete on sending.

386

387

388

389

390

391

392

In addition to providing when service was complete,

old Rule 8011(c)(3) addressed what happened if the person

making electronic service received notice that the document

was not received by the person to be served. The latter is now

addressed by new Rules 8011(c)(1)(A) and (c)(2)(D), which

provide that electronic service is not effective if the filer or

sender learns that it did not reach the person to be served.

393

394

395

396

397

398

399

400

401

402

Subdivision (c)(4). New Rule 8011(c)(4) defines the

term “notice of case activity” as any electronic notice

provided to case participants through the court’s electronicfiling system to inform them of a filing or other activity on

the docket. There are two equivalent terms currently in use:

Notice of Electronic Filing and Notice of Docket Activity.

“Notice of case activity” is intended to encompass both of

those terms, as well as any equivalent terms that may come

into use in future. The word “electronic” is deleted as

superfluous now that electronic filing is the default method.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 90 of 209

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE1

Rule 9006. Computing and Extending Time;

Motions

*****

(f)

Additional Time After Certain Service. When a

party may or must act within a specified time after

being served and service is made by mail or under

Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(23)(D) (leaving with the clerk)

or (F) (other means consented to), 3 days are added

after the period would otherwise expire under (a).

*****

Committee Note

Subdivision (f) is amended to conform to the

renumbering of Civil Rule 5(b)(2) as Rule 5(b)(3).

New material is underlined in red; matter to be omitted

is lined through.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 91 of 209

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE1

Rule 9036. Electronic Notice and Service

(a)

In General. This rule applies whenever these rules

require or permit sending a notice or serving a

document by mail or other means.

(b)

Notices from and Service by the Court.

(1)

To Registered Users. The clerk may send

notice to or serve a registered user by filing

the notice or document with the court’s

electronic-filing system.

(2)

To All Recipients. For any recipient, the clerk

may send notice or serve a document by

electronic means that the recipient consented

to in writing, including by designating an

electronic address for receiving notices. But

New material is underlined in red; matter to be omitted

is lined through.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 92 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

these exceptions apply:

(A)

if the recipient has registered an

electronic

Administrative Office of the United

States Courts’ bankruptcy-noticing

program, the clerk must use that

address; and

(B)

address

with

the

if an entity has been designated by the

Director of the Administrative Office

of the United States Courts as a high-

volume paper-notice recipient, the

clerk may send the notice to or serve

the document electronically at an

address designated by the Director,

unless the entity has designated an

address under § 342(e) or (f).

(c)

Notices from and Service by an Entity. An entity

may send notice or serve a document in the same

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 93 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

manner that the clerk does under (b), excluding

(b)(2)(A) and (B).

(1)

Notice of Case Activity Sent Through the

Court’s Electronic-Filing System. A notice

of case activity sent to an entity registered to

receive it through the court’s electronic-filing

system constitutes notice or service on that

entity, with these qualifications:

(A)

such notice or service is not effective

if the filer learns that it did not reach

the entity to be notified or served; and

(B)

a court may provide by order or local

rule that if a document is filed under

seal, neither service nor notice occurs

under this paragraph (c)(1).

(2)

Electronic Means Consented To. An entity

may also send notice or serve a document by

electronic means that the recipient consented

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 94 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

to in writing, including by designating an

electronic address for receiving notices. But

such notice or service is not effective if the

sender learns that it did not reach the entity to

be notified or served.

(3)

Definition of “Notice of Case Activity.” The

term “notice of case activity” includes a

notice of docket activity, a notice of

electronic filing, and any other similar

electronic

participants through the court’s electronic-

filing system to inform them of activity on the

docket.

(d)

notice

provided

case

When Notice or Service Is Complete; Keeping an

Address Current.

(1)

Notice of Case Activity Sent Through the

Court’s Electronic-Filing System. For any

notice or service deadlines, notice or service

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 95 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

by a notice of case activity is complete as of

the date of filing. For any deadlines that run

from the date of notice or service, notice or

service by a notice of case activity is

complete as of the date of the notice of case

activity.

(2)

Other Electronic Means. Electronic notice

or service by other electronic means is

complete upon filing or sending but is not

effective if the filer or sender receives notice

that it did not reach the person to be notified

or served.

(3)

Keeping an Address Current. The recipient

must keep its electronic address current with

the clerk.

(e)

Inapplicability. This rule does not apply to any

document required to be served in accordance with

Rule 7004.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 96 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

Committee Note

Rule 9036 is amended to address service by

unrepresented individuals. (Concurrent amendments are

made to Rules 5005 and 8011 and to Civil Rule 5, Criminal

Rule 49, and Appellate Rule 25.) Rule 9036(c) is amended

to address service of documents filed by an unrepresented

individual in paper form. Because all such paper filings are

uploaded by court staff into the court’s electronic-filing

system, there is no need to require separate paper service by

the filer on case participants who receive an electronic notice

of the filing from the court’s electronic-filing system.

Conforming amendments are made to Rule 9036(d).

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

Subdivision (c). Rule 9036(c) previously stated

simply that “[a]n entity may send notice or serve a document

in the same manner that the clerk does under (b), excluding

(b)(2)(A) and (B).” That provision could be read to exclude

instances when an unrepresented individual files a document

in paper form and the clerk’s office scans the document and

uploads it into the court’s electronic-filing system. Thus

read, the previous rules required separate (paper) service in

such instances, even on litigants who were registered to

receive a notice of case activity from the court’s electronicfiling system. New Rule 9036(c) restates the substance of the

service options previously incorporated by reference to Rule

9036(b), but does so in a way that changes the rule

concerning service by a litigant who makes a filing other

than through the court’s electronic-filing system.

114

115

116

117

118

119

New Rule 9036(c)(1) eliminates the requirement of

separate (paper) service on a litigant who is registered to

receive a notice of case activity from the court’s electronicfiling system. Litigants who are registered to receive a notice

of case activity include those litigants who are participating

in the court’s electronic-filing system with respect to the

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 97 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

case in question and also include those litigants who receive

the notice because they have registered for a court-based

electronic-noticing program. (Prior Rule 9036(c)’s provision

for notice or service “in the same manner that the clerk does

under” Rule 9036(b)(1) had already eliminated the

requirement of paper service on registered users of the

court’s electronic-filing system by other registered users of

the system; the amendment extends this exemption from

paper service to those who file a document with the court by

a means other than through the court’s electronic-filing

system.)

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

New Rule 9036(c)(1)(A) provides that notice or

service by means of the court’s electronic-filing system is

not effective if the filer learns that it did not reach the person

to be notified or served. This provision carries forward the

principle previously contained in prior Rule 9036(d). Prior

Rule 9036(d) stated that “Electronic notice or service is

complete upon filing or sending but is not effective if the

filer or sender receives notice that it did not reach the person

to be notified or served.” By contrast, the parallel provisions

in current Civil Rule 5 and Criminal Rule 49 use “learns”

instead of “receives notice.” In drafting the 2018

amendments to Rules 8011 and 9036, the Bankruptcy Rules

Committee had chosen “receives notice” in order to prevent

litigants from purposely ignoring notice to avoid learning

that the document was not received. However, the term

“learns” is the broader term and it encompasses “receiving

notice.” Thus, the amended Rules 8011 and 9036 use

“learns” in conformity with the other sets of rules.

149

150

151

152

153

New Rule 9036(c)(1)(B) states that a court may

provide by order or local rule that if a paper is filed under

seal, notice or service must occur by other means. This is

designed to account for districts or BAPs in which parties in

the case cannot access other participants’ sealed filings via

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 98 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

154

the court’s electronic-filing system.

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

What is now Rule 9036(c)(2) carries forward the

prior option to effect notice or service by consented-to

electronic means. It also provides that such notice or service

is not effective if the sender learns that it did not reach the

entity to be notified or served. This provision carries forward

the principle previously contained in prior Rule 9036(d). As

noted above with respect to subdivision (c)(1), the amended

rule in subdivision (c)(2) uses “learns” instead of the prior

rule’s “receives notice.”

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

New Rule 9036(c)(3) defines the term “notice of case

activity” as any electronic notice provided to case

participants through the court’s electronic-filing system to

inform them of a filing or other activity on the docket. There

are two equivalent terms currently in use: Notice of

Electronic Filing and Notice of Docket Activity. “Notice of

case activity” is intended to encompass both of those terms,

as well as any equivalent terms that may come into use in

future. The word “electronic” is deleted as superfluous now

that electronic filing is the default method.

174

175

176

177

178

179

Subdivision (d). New subdivision (d)(2) carries

forward the rule’s prior treatment of the timing of notice or

service by electronic means other than the court’s electronicfiling system. New subdivision (d)(1) addresses the timing

of notice or service through the court’s electronic-filing

system.

180

181

182

183

184

185

Previously, Rule 9036(d) provided simply that

“Electronic notice or service is complete upon filing or

sending but is not effective if the filer or sender receives

notice that it did not reach the person to be notified or

served.” The adoption of new Rule 9036(c)(1) requires a

change to Rule 9036(d): Under new subdivision (c)(1), when

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 99 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

a litigant files a paper other than through the court’s

electronic-filing system, service on a litigant who is

registered to receive a notice of case activity through the

court’s electronic-filing system occurs by means of the

notice of case activity. But when the filing is made other than

through the court’s electronic-filing system, there can be a

short time lag between the date the litigant files the

document with the court and the date that the clerk’s office

uploads it into the court’s electronic-filing system. Thus,

new subdivision (d)(1) provides that, for purposes of any

deadlines for notifying or making service, notice or service

by a notice of case activity is complete as of the date of

filing. But the amended rule provides that, for purposes of

any deadlines that run from the date of notice or service,

notice or service is complete as of the date of the notice of

case activity. Thus, the amended rule ensures that if there is

a delay between the date the court receives a filing not made

through the electronic-filing system and the date the court

uploads that filing into the electronic-filing system, that

delay will not diminish the time allowed to the party whose

deadline runs from the date of notice or service.

207

208

209

210

New subdivision (d)(2) carries forward—for notice

or service by other electronic means—the prior rule’s

treatment; that is, such notice or service is complete upon

sending.

211

212

213

214

215

Prior Rule 9036(d)’s provision that electronic notice

or service is not effective if the filer or sender receives notice

that it did not reach the person to be notified or served is

revised and relocated to new Rules 9036(c)(1)(A) and

9036(c)(2).

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 100 of 209

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL

RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE1

Rule 9037. Protecting Privacy for Filings

(a)

Redacted Filings. Unless the court orders otherwise,

in an electronic or paper filing with the court,

including any exhibit or attachment, that contains an

individual’s

identification number, or birth date, the name of an

individual, other than the debtor, known to be and

identified as a minor, or a financial-account number,

a party or nonparty making the filing may include

only:

(1)

number,

taxpayer-

the last four digits of the social-security

number and taxpayer-identification number;

social-security

(2)

the year of the individual’s birth;

New material is underlined in red; matter to be omitted is

lined through.

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 101 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

(3)

the minor’s initials a pseudonym in place of

the name of the individual known to be and

identified as a minor; and

(4)

last

four

digits

the financial-

account number.

the

(b)

Exemptions from the Redaction Requirement.

The redaction requirement does not apply to the

following:

(1)

a financial-account number that identifies the

property allegedly subject to forfeiture in a

forfeiture proceeding;

(2)

the record of an administrative or agency

proceeding, unless filed with a proof of

claim;

(3)

the official record of a state-court proceeding;

(4)

the record of a court or tribunal, if that record

was not subject to the redaction requirement

when originally filed;

Preliminary Draft of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules

August 2026

Page 102 of 209

FEDERAL RULES OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE

(5)

a filing covered by (c); and

(6)

a filing subject to § 110.

(c)

Filings Made Under Seal. The court may order that

a filing be made under seal without redaction. The

court may later unseal the filing or order the entity

that made it to file a redacted version for the public

record.

(d)

Protective Orders. For cause, the court may by

order in a case:

(1)

require redaction of additional information;

(2)

limit or prohibit a nonparty’s

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.