The members of the Court, having discussed some recurrent problems seen in attorney fee petitions, wish to communicate the following information to members of the bar.  In deciding fee petitions, the Court must determine the reasonable number of hours expended by counsel for the party seeking fees, and the reasonable hourly rate of that counsel. Even if there is no objection to either the hours or the rates, the Court has an independent duty to review the petition for reasonableness. Gates v. Deukmejian, 987 F.2d 1392, 1401 (9th Cir. 1993).

Increasingly, the Court has reviewed fee petitions where all or a substantial part of an attorney's time for one day is billed as a "block" without segregating time for individual tasks. This makes assessing the reasonableness of the time spent on a particular task extremely difficult. The Court recommends that members of the bar record time spent on particular, individual tasks and support their fee petitions with a level of documentation that allows the Court, and opposing counsel, to adequately review the reasonableness of the time spent on a single task.

Additionally, the Court frequently sees time billed for items such as "conference", "telephone call with...", or "correspondence to..." with no description of the subject of the conference, the call, or the correspondence. This too makes it nearly impossible to assess the reasonableness of the requested time. Because the burden to document the reasonableness of the requested fees is on the attorney requesting fees, fee petitions that fail to support the reasonableness of the request due to one of these problems may be denied, at least in part. As for the reasonable hourly rate, the Court has determined that it will use the Oregon State Bar Economic Survey as its initial benchmark. The current edition of the Economic Survey is available on the Oregon State Bar's website. Attorneys may argue for higher rates based on inflation, specialty, or any number of other factors. However, the Court requests that fee petitions address the Economic Survey and provide justification for requested hourly rates higher than reported by the Survey.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1861, all litigants "have the right to grand and petit juries selected at random from a fair cross section of the community." The Court uses a two-step process to select jurors. First, a master jury wheel is created by selecting names at random from the voter registration list obtained from the Oregon Secretary of State Elections Division. Then, names are randomly drawn periodically from the master jury wheel to receive juror qualification questionnaires. Individuals' answers to the questionnaires determine whether they are legally qualified to serve. If so, the names of those persons are put in a qualified jury wheel. As prospective jurors are needed for a specific trial or grand jury, juror summonses are sent to the persons randomly selected from the qualified jury wheel. All of these selections are carried out through a properly programmed electronic data processing system for pure randomized selection. The pure randomized process ensures that the mathematical odds of any single name being selected are substantially equal.

This notice is posted in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1864(a).

Registered users of Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) should be aware of the potential to inadvertently share docket and/or hearing information when using third-party services or software. Sharing your PACER account credentials with a third-party service provider or designating that provider as a secondary recipient of a Notice of Electronic Filing or Notice of Docket Activity (NEF) can potentially allow that third party access to restricted information. You are urged to use caution in your computer security practices to ensure that restricted information to which you have access is not disclosed.

When you provide a check as payment, you authorize the Court either to use information from your check to make a one-time electronic fund transfer from your account or to process the payment as a check transaction.  For inquiries, please call the Clerk's Office at 503-326-8000.

Privacy Act – A Privacy Act Statement required by 5 U.S.C. § 552a(e)(3) that states our authority for soliciting and collecting the information from your check and explaining the purposes and routine uses which will be made of your check information, is available from the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, U.S. Department of the Treasury, and may be obtained through the mail by calling 1-866-945-7920 (toll free). Furnishing the check information is voluntary, but a decision not to do so will require you to make payment by some other method.

Important Notice Regarding Personal Data Identifiers and Other Sensitive Information

ELECTRONIC AVAILABILITY OF CASE FILE INFORMATION AND REMINDER REGARDING PERSONAL DATA IDENTIFIERS AND OTHER SENSITIVE INFORMATION

Litigants and counsel of record are strongly advised to follow and adhere to the rules, policies, and procedures regarding personal data identifiers to ensure that personal or otherwise sensitive information is appropriately redacted from court filings.

Personal identifier information is not to be included in any document filed with the court unless such inclusion is necessary and relevant to the case. Any personal information not otherwise protected will be made available over the Internet via PACER. Furthermore, be advised that the responsibility to redact filings rests with counsel and the party or non-party making the filing. The clerk is not required to review documents filed with the court for compliance with the privacy rules.

In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2, and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1, unless the court orders otherwise, parties should refrain from including the following personal identifiers in documents (whether electronic or paper) when filed with the court. If a filing contains the following items, the filing party must redact as follows:

• Social Security numbers redacted to the last four numbers, e.g., xxx-xx-1234
• Names of Minor Children redacted to initials only, e.g., A.B.
• Dates of Birth redacted to the year only, e.g., 1950
• Financial Account Numbers redacted to the last four digits, e.g., xxxxxxxx3567
• Tax-payer identification information to the last four digits, e.g., xx-xxxx4578
• Personal Addresses redacted to the city and state in criminal cases only, e.g., Portland, OR.

In addition, filers are advised to exercise caution when filing documents that contain the following:

1. Personal identifying number, such as driver's license number;
2. Medical records, treatment and diagnosis;
3. Employment history;
4. Individual financial information; and
5. Proprietary or trade secret information

In compliance with the E-Government Act of 2002, a party wishing to file a document containing the personal data identifiers specified above have the following options. The filer may submit an unredacted document under seal. This document will be retained by the court as part of the record. The court may, however, still require the party to file a redacted copy for the public file. Alternatively, the filer may submit a reference list under seal. The reference list is to contain the complete personal data identifier and the redacted identifiers used in their place in the filing. All references in the case to the redacted identifiers included in the reference list will be construed to refer to the corresponding complete identifier. The reference list is to be filed under seal, retained as part of the court record, and may be amended as of right.

Counsel are strongly urged to share this notice with all clients so that an informed decision about the inclusion of certain materials may be made.

The recording of audio, video, or still images by means of any recording device is prohibited anywhere in District of Oregon courthouses, including courtrooms, except as authorized by a judge for ceremonial or educational purposes. This prohibition extends to judicial proceedings conducted remotely by teleconference, videoconference, or by any other means of electronic communication. (See Local Rule 83-13.)

For more information, visit the U.S. Courts website.

Some hearings before the Court are scheduled to occur remotely. Judges presiding at such hearings, in their discretion, may provide remote public audio access for certain civil proceedings. Members of the public who would like to listen to a live hearing may call the District Court Clerk’s Office in the appropriate division to inquire as to whether an audio transmission by telephone of the remote hearing will be available, or if public access to the hearing will only be available in the courtroom where the presiding judge sits. If an audio transmission by telephone of a remote proceeding is available, the Clerk’s Office will provide the connection information upon request.

Unless otherwise permitted by the presiding judge, case participants who receive teleconference or videoconference connection information from the Court for the purpose of participating in a proceeding may not re-distribute the connection information. Local Civil Procedure Rule 83-13 prohibits recording proceedings conducted remotely by teleconference, videoconference, or by any other means of electronic communication.

Use of the District of Oregon Wi-Fi Network ("network") is authorized only for individuals conducting business at the Court and may be monitored. The Court does not guarantee the quality, reliability, or security of this Internet service. The password is available from the courtroom deputy, however, court staff will not provide technical assistance for this service. The use of wireless devices in the courthouse is governed by Local Rule of Civil Procedure 83-14, which prohibits the recording of audio, video, or still images by means of any recording device anywhere in District of Oregon courthouses, including courtrooms, except as authorized by a judge for ceremonial or educational purposes. This prohibition extends to judicial proceedings conducted remotely by teleconference, videoconference, or by any other means of electronic communication.

By using the network, users agree to be solely responsible for the content of all information they disseminate or receive. Users should be aware that there are security, privacy, and confidentiality risks inherent in wireless communications and associated technology, and the Court does not make any assurances or warranties relating to such risks. No information you consider confidential should be transmitted via this system. By using the system, users agree to be solely responsible for the content of disseminated information. Moreover, by using the network, users agree that the Court is not liable for any costs or damages, special, incidental or consequential, arising from the use of this service. The Court is not responsible for any materials, information, products, or services on the Internet and does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of any communication made over the network.

The Court reserves the right to deny or restrict access to any user who abuses the network, such as by excessive bandwidth consumption or by using the network for any type of activity or purpose deemed by the Court to be unlawful, harassing, abusive, criminal, or fraudulent. The Court also reserves the right to monitor, intercept, and disclose any transmissions over or using its facilities, and to provide user information, use records, and other related information under certain circumstances (for example, in response to lawful process, orders, subpoenas, or warrants, or to protect the interests of the Court) to appropriate authorities.

By connecting to the network, users acknowledge that they fully understand and agree to these terms of use.