Page 14 - CLT081020

14 ¦ AUGUST 10, 2020 NEWS

Appeals Court Rules Federal Judiciary
Misused PACER Fees in Class Action Suit

By Jacqueline Thomsen, Amanda Bronstad

A PACER web page screenshot.
federal appeals court on Thursday upheld a electronic docketing information,” the opinion from
district court’s finding that the federal judicia- Judges Raymond Clevenger, Alan Lourie and Todd
ry had improperly covered certain expenses Hughes reads.
with PACER fees in a class action lawsuit challeng- “If Congress had intended to limit fees only to the
ing the user fees charged for access to court records. extent necessary to reimburse expenses incurred in
The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the providing access to PACER, it would have said so
Federal Circuit affirmed Senior U.S. District Judge more clearly,” the opinion, written by Hughes, states.
Ellen Huvelle’s finding that did not fully side with ei- “We can give full effect to the 2002 amendment by
ther party. In Thursday’s opinion, the appeals court reading it as removing the electronic access fee ob-
found Huvelle “got it just right” and that it too does ligation and encouraging the judiciary to rein in
not “accept either party’s reading” of a statute per- fees—without imparting any specific limitation on
taining to PACER fees. the fee-setting.”
“Instead, we agree with the district court’s inter- However, the panel found the federal govern-
pretation that § 1913 Note limits PACER fees to ment’s claims “stray too far in the other direction.”
the amount needed to cover expenses incurred in “We reject the government’s proposed textual in-
services providing public access to federal court terpretation of § 1913 Note as authorizing fees to

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune