Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) is an electronic public access service that allows users to obtain case information from the federal courts. PACER is a service of the Unites States Judiciary, provided by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. PACER allows a registered user to access case information through the Internet or a dial-up connection using a computer and a modem. For more information on PACER, please visit the PACER website at http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov. This system may also be referred to as WebPACER or PACERNet.

The Case Management/Electronic Case Files Project (CM/ECF) is a new case management system that allows courts to manage electronic documents. It also allows each court to receive filings electronically, pursuant to local rule or order. PACER and CM/ECF operate together to increase public access to court records. PACER facilitates electronic access to docket sheets and allows access to images of other court documents that were either filed electronically or created from a traditionally filed document.

Implementation of the CM/ECF system has begun in bankruptcy courts and will begin in district courts in 2002 and in appellate courts in 2003. Some courts, however, volunteered to be prototype courts for the CM/ECF system and have been using it for quite awhile. For more specific information on these courts and how they use the CM/ECF system, please visit the PACER website at http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/cmecf.index.html.

No. Courts will not have to go back and redact documents filed before adoption of the policy. Likewise, courts will not be required to eliminate electronic access to documents that could be electronically accessed prior to the policy, although some courts may choose to do so. Also, the responsibility to redact documents will not be on the clerk’s office. It will be the attorneys’ responsibility to inform their clients that case files may be obtained electronically and ensure private information is not included in the case files. The clerk’s office will not be required to review filings for compliance with the policy.

Each court, as it makes electronic access to documents available either through the implementation of CM/ECF or the imaging of documents, is being encouraged to provide notice of such access to the bar and the public. The Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management has drafted a model notice expressly for this purpose. This notice makes the reader aware that the court has begun to make access to case documents electronically available on the Internet via PACER. It further cautions that counsel and parties should think very carefully before filing any document with the court, because that document, once filed, will be available on the Internet. The bar and the public will also receive some instruction on the operation and use of the CM/ECF system as it is implemented in courts. It is anticipated that some of this instruction will touch on the privacy issues and the policy itself.

Yes. In order for the policy to apply to both paper and electronic files, there will need to be a change in the information included in paper or traditionally filed documents. Personal identifiers, such as Social Security numbers, financial account numbers, dates of birth and the names of minor children, must be redacted. Thus, when counsel prepares any document to be filed, whether traditionally or electronically, counsel must be sure that such information is redacted. Courts should be developing local rules to implement this change in procedure. The Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management has prepared a model local rule addressing this issue.

This statement simply means that the policy does not in and of itself create a cause of action against the court, the clerk of the court, counsel or any other individual or entity on behalf of any individual or entity that may have identifying information erroneously included in a filed document that is made available on the Internet via PACER. As made clear by this document, it is the responsibility of the parties and counsel to ensure the redaction or omission of personal, identifying information. The clerk of court will not examine filed documents for compliance and does not have the responsibility to do so. The reference to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is included to remind and caution counsel that they can be subject to this Rule, and any other provision giving disciplinary powers to the court over counsel, for any willful or deliberate violation of this policy.

The redaction procedures will be instituted in each district court by local rule or standing order. The responsibility to redact personal identifiers from pleadings, or not to include such information at all, rests solely with counsel and the parties. The clerk’s office will not review each pleading or attachment for compliance with the policy.

If you have a legitimate need for this information, you should request it during discovery. Answers to discovery are not filed with the court and, therefore, not subject to the redaction provisions of the policy unless and until they are attached to or included in a pleading filed with the court.

These cases are being treated differently because of their nature and the type of information routinely included in these case files. A Social Security case is the continuation of an administrative proceeding brought by a person seeking to enforce his or her rights under a government program. The files in these cases are confidential until a complaint is filed in the district court. The information contained in these files is largely medical and very often is extremely detailed. This medical information is absolutely essential to a determination of the applicant’s eligibility for benefits and would not be useful to the court in a redacted form. However, it was determined that the general public should not have electronic access to this information because of its personal nature and the potential for misuse. The full content of Social Security case files will still be available at the courthouse. Counsel may have remote access to the electronic documents, if a court has electronic versions of documents filed in Social Security cases. However, the court does not have to create electronic versions of the documents solely to provide electronic access to parties and counsel.

Yes. The policy does allow electronic access to criminal files by counsel in the case. However, in some districts, there are technical problems in making these case file documents available only to the allowed counsel. Every attempt is being made to adjust the technical operation of the access systems to allow counsel remote electronic access to criminal case file documents.

These cases are civil cases derived from criminal proceedings and will be treated as civil cases for purposes of this policy.

The Court Administration and Case Management Committee is in the process of developing a specific course of action to study this issue including a pilot program that will allow a limited number of courts to provide public remote electronic access to all criminal case file information for the purpose of studying and evaluating the effects of such access.

Yes. Courts can begin to educate the bar and litigants about the availability of documents on the Internet via PACER and the implementation of CM/ECF in the bankruptcy courts. Courts can also review their own internal procedures, local rules and standing orders to be sure that they are not collecting and displaying personal identifiers when not required by statute, rule or form. Courts can begin to enforce the redaction of financial account numbers, dates of birth and the names of minor children on all paper and electronic bankruptcy filings. However, the redaction of Social Security numbers must wait until the statute, rules and forms have been amended.

For Additional Information about the CM/ECF project in the District of Oregon, contact us at: info@ord.uscourts.gov