Let's Talk 9th Circuit! Forum

[Anonymous User]

Preliminary assignments are given by the presiding judge (the most senior CA9 judge on active status of the three) over a month in advance of oral argument. After argument, the most senior judge in the majority assigns the opinion. This almost always goes to the judge who had the preliminary assignment unless, of course, they're dissenting, in which case the more senior of the two in the majority will choose who writes.

Further, the choice regarding whether an opinion is published or unpublished is often influenced by whoever the preliminary assignment is. There are always some clear decisions calls (new issues vs obviously pointless cases), but preliminary assignment judge has greater say on the close calls. So some judges just make more of their preliminary assignments into published decisions

When thinking about clerkships, how much could/should one read into the volume of a judge’s published decisions relative to other judges? For example, all else being equal, does it matter that judge A has historically issued more published opinions than judge B?

No.

It’s not going to matter to anyone but you as the clerk working on it. If you want to draft a bunch of published opinions, go work for Milan Smith. Personally, I’d prefer to draft 2-3 opinions over the course of the year. Opinions are a lot of work.

Only 2-3? I think I drafted close to 11-13 my term.

I assume that includes unpublished though? I don't even think there are many judges who have 12 published opinions a term let alone have one clerk write 12 of them.

I looked up my records and I had 10 published and 2 unpublished that I made note of. There were also other orders and misc things.

[Anonymous User]

Further, the choice regarding whether an opinion is published or unpublished is often influenced by whoever the preliminary assignment is. There are always some clear decisions calls (new issues vs obviously pointless cases), but preliminary assignment judge has greater say on the close calls. So some judges just make more of their preliminary assignments into published decisions

When thinking about clerkships, how much could/should one read into the volume of a judge’s published decisions relative to other judges? For example, all else being equal, does it matter that judge A has historically issued more published opinions than judge B?

No.

It’s not going to matter to anyone but you as the clerk working on it. If you want to draft a bunch of published opinions, go work for Milan Smith. Personally, I’d prefer to draft 2-3 opinions over the course of the year. Opinions are a lot of work.

Only 2-3? I think I drafted close to 11-13 my term.

I assume that includes unpublished though? I don't even think there are many judges who have 12 published opinions a term let alone have one clerk write 12 of them.

I looked up my records and I had 10 published and 2 unpublished that I made note of. There were also other orders and misc things.

Including concurrences and dissents? That could make sense if you clerked for a judge that often writes separately.

[Anonymous User]

When thinking about clerkships, how much could/should one read into the volume of a judge’s published decisions relative to other judges? For example, all else being equal, does it matter that judge A has historically issued more published opinions than judge B?

No.

It’s not going to matter to anyone but you as the clerk working on it. If you want to draft a bunch of published opinions, go work for Milan Smith. Personally, I’d prefer to draft 2-3 opinions over the course of the year. Opinions are a lot of work.

Only 2-3? I think I drafted close to 11-13 my term.

I assume that includes unpublished though? I don't even think there are many judges who have 12 published opinions a term let alone have one clerk write 12 of them.

I looked up my records and I had 10 published and 2 unpublished that I made note of. There were also other orders and misc things.

Including concurrences and dissents? That could make sense if you clerked for a judge that often writes separately.

It has to be write? A judge who wrote 40 published majority opinions in a year (assuming equally split among clerks) would frankly be insane. Hell more than 25 would be crazy and I'd feel like I hear about it. I also don't understand the 10-2 split. Is this judge maybe publishing his random sentencing affirmances for no reason maybe?

[Anonymous User]

No.

It’s not going to matter to anyone but you as the clerk working on it. If you want to draft a bunch of published opinions, go work for Milan Smith. Personally, I’d prefer to draft 2-3 opinions over the course of the year. Opinions are a lot of work.

Only 2-3? I think I drafted close to 11-13 my term.

I assume that includes unpublished though? I don't even think there are many judges who have 12 published opinions a term let alone have one clerk write 12 of them.

I looked up my records and I had 10 published and 2 unpublished that I made note of. There were also other orders and misc things.

Including concurrences and dissents? That could make sense if you clerked for a judge that often writes separately.

It has to be write? A judge who wrote 40 published majority opinions in a year (assuming equally split among clerks) would frankly be insane. Hell more than 25 would be crazy and I'd feel like I hear about it. I also don't understand the 10-2 split. Is this judge maybe publishing his random sentencing affirmances for no reason maybe?

The First Circuit publishes everything. Maybe it’s a judge there (but I assume it’s the Ninth, based on the thread title).

[Anonymous User]

No.

It’s not going to matter to anyone but you as the clerk working on it. If you want to draft a bunch of published opinions, go work for Milan Smith. Personally, I’d prefer to draft 2-3 opinions over the course of the year. Opinions are a lot of work.

Only 2-3? I think I drafted close to 11-13 my term.

I assume that includes unpublished though? I don't even think there are many judges who have 12 published opinions a term let alone have one clerk write 12 of them.

I looked up my records and I had 10 published and 2 unpublished that I made note of. There were also other orders and misc things.

Including concurrences and dissents? That could make sense if you clerked for a judge that often writes separately.

It has to be write? A judge who wrote 40 published majority opinions in a year (assuming equally split among clerks) would frankly be insane. Hell more than 25 would be crazy and I'd feel like I hear about it. I also don't understand the 10-2 split. Is this judge maybe publishing his random sentencing affirmances for no reason maybe?

It seemed rather standard to me, I'm a bit surprised - what were you doing all year? I clerked on the Fifth, and although the opinions weren’t evenly split among the clerks, I don’t believe our writings differed that much. I had just one dissent and one holdover case from the previous year. There were also several routine sentence affirmances and other items I didn’t document. The two unpublished cases I noted originated from motions panels and required some considerable effort.

[Anonymous User]

It’s not going to matter to anyone but you as the clerk working on it. If you want to draft a bunch of published opinions, go work for Milan Smith. Personally, I’d prefer to draft 2-3 opinions over the course of the year. Opinions are a lot of work.

Only 2-3? I think I drafted close to 11-13 my term.

I assume that includes unpublished though? I don't even think there are many judges who have 12 published opinions a term let alone have one clerk write 12 of them.

I looked up my records and I had 10 published and 2 unpublished that I made note of. There were also other orders and misc things.

Including concurrences and dissents? That could make sense if you clerked for a judge that often writes separately.

It has to be write? A judge who wrote 40 published majority opinions in a year (assuming equally split among clerks) would frankly be insane. Hell more than 25 would be crazy and I'd feel like I hear about it. I also don't understand the 10-2 split. Is this judge maybe publishing his random sentencing affirmances for no reason maybe?

It seemed rather standard to me, I'm a bit surprised - what were you doing all year? I clerked on the Fifth, and although the opinions weren’t evenly split among the clerks, I don’t believe our writings differed that much. I had just one dissent and one holdover case from the previous year. There were also several routine sentence affirmances and other items I didn’t document. The two unpublished cases I noted originated from motions panels and required some considerable effort.

There must be a miscommunication here. Maybe you all are including unpublsihed opinions with published opinions because technically they end up on the federal appendix (and now just westlaw, since F. App'x is gone) and the unpublished stuff is something else? Circuit courts do not publish many opinions. In fact, the Ninth Circuit in 2023 published only 349 opinions. Split among what 29 active judges and 15 or so more senior judges thats less thats maybe 6 to 20 a judge total. A single judge writing over 10% of all the published opinions in that circuit would be big news.

https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/ ... 0.2023.pdf

[Anonymous User]

Only 2-3? I think I drafted close to 11-13 my term.

I assume that includes unpublished though? I don't even think there are many judges who have 12 published opinions a term let alone have one clerk write 12 of them.

I looked up my records and I had 10 published and 2 unpublished that I made note of. There were also other orders and misc things.

Including concurrences and dissents? That could make sense if you clerked for a judge that often writes separately.

It has to be write? A judge who wrote 40 published majority opinions in a year (assuming equally split among clerks) would frankly be insane. Hell more than 25 would be crazy and I'd feel like I hear about it. I also don't understand the 10-2 split. Is this judge maybe publishing his random sentencing affirmances for no reason maybe?

It seemed rather standard to me, I'm a bit surprised - what were you doing all year? I clerked on the Fifth, and although the opinions weren’t evenly split among the clerks, I don’t believe our writings differed that much. I had just one dissent and one holdover case from the previous year. There were also several routine sentence affirmances and other items I didn’t document. The two unpublished cases I noted originated from motions panels and required some considerable effort.

There must be a miscommunication here. Maybe you all are including unpublsihed opinions with published opinions because technically they end up on the federal appendix (and now just westlaw, since F. App'x is gone) and the unpublished stuff is something else? Circuit courts do not publish many opinions. In fact, the Ninth Circuit in 2023 published only 349 opinions. Split among what 29 active judges and 15 or so more senior judges thats less thats maybe 6 to 20 a judge total. A single judge writing over 10% of all the published opinions in that circuit would be big news.

https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/ ... 0.2023.pdf

The 10/2 poster said they clerked on the Fifth. Granted I, as a CA9 clerk, know very little about CA5, but the 10/2 numbers seem very strange in any case.

But the more perplexing question: why is a CA5 clerk commenting on a CA9 thread and presenting numbers based on their CA5 experience when others are discussing their CA9 experiences? And all of this anonymously, at that?

Typical TLS shenanigans.

[Anonymous User]

There must be a miscommunication here. Maybe you all are including unpublsihed opinions with published opinions because technically they end up on the federal appendix (and now just westlaw, since F. App'x is gone) and the unpublished stuff is something else? Circuit courts do not publish many opinions. In fact, the Ninth Circuit in 2023 published only 349 opinions. Split among what 29 active judges and 15 or so more senior judges thats less thats maybe 6 to 20 a judge total. A single judge writing over 10% of all the published opinions in that circuit would be big news.

https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/ ... 0.2023.pdf

The 10/2 poster said they clerked on the Fifth. Granted I, as a CA9 clerk, know very little about CA5, but the 10/2 numbers seem very strange in any case.

But the more perplexing question: why is a CA5 clerk commenting on a CA9 thread and presenting numbers based on their CA5 experience when others are discussing their CA9 experiences? And all of this anonymously, at that?

Typical TLS shenanigans.

By the link one of the posters put down, it seems the 5th publishes far more often on a per capita basis than the 9th. And yes, I am aware of what an unpublished opinion is, and yes, my numbers are accurate for my year.

I only commented because a poster indicated they'd be happy to get 3 published opinions, which seemed very low to me, so I wanted more information.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone know if R. Nelson tends to reach out when rejecting after a screener? I.e., is not hearing any updates a soft reject, or can that mean you are still under consideration, even if for a future year?

Bumping this, curious as well.

[Anonymous User]

CA9 clerk here. I had two published opinions, half of another, and a high-profile dissent during my term. Those seemed like average numbers. CA9 doesn't publish very much, a judge might get only 1-2 publication assignments per sitting.

[Anonymous User]

Can someone explain how CA9 opinions are assigned? What explains the discrepancy between some judges authoring tons of opinions vs others writing far fewer published decisions?

Preliminary assignments are given by the presiding judge (the most senior CA9 judge on active status of the three) over a month in advance of oral argument. After argument, the most senior judge in the majority assigns the opinion. This almost always goes to the judge who had the preliminary assignment unless, of course, they're dissenting, in which case the more senior of the two in the majority will choose who writes.

Further, the choice regarding whether an opinion is published or unpublished is often influenced by whoever the preliminary assignment is. There are always some clear decisions calls (new issues vs obviously pointless cases), but preliminary assignment judge has greater say on the close calls. So some judges just make more of their preliminary assignments into published decisions

When thinking about clerkships, how much could/should one read into the volume of a judge’s published decisions relative to other judges? For example, all else being equal, does it matter that judge A has historically issued more published opinions than judge B?

No.

It’s not going to matter to anyone but you as the clerk working on it. If you want to draft a bunch of published opinions, go work for Milan Smith. Personally, I’d prefer to draft 2-3 opinions over the course of the year. Opinions are a lot of work.

Only 2-3? I think I drafted close to 11-13 my term.

Published opinions?? That’s hard to believe. It would mean your judge was publishing 40-50 opinions a year, which I don’t think anyone is doing.

ETA: I see someone already beat me to this

[Antiherotrust]

Anyone know if R. Nelson tends to reach out when rejecting after a screener? I.e., is not hearing any updates a soft reject, or can that mean you are still under consideration, even if for a future year?

Curious about this.

[Anonymous User]

Which ND Cal judges tend to produce the highest quality work?

[Anonymous User]

Which ND Cal judges tend to produce the highest quality work?

Chhabria by far. And then I'd put Seeborg, Gilliam, and Tigar as the next tier.

[Anonymous User]

Which ND Cal judges tend to produce the highest quality work?

Chhabria by far. And then I'd put Seeborg, Gilliam, and Tigar as the next tier.

Does this align with how competitive those clerkships are? Chhabria is obviously in a league of his own as a feeder. But what about the others?

[Anonymous User]

Which ND Cal judges tend to produce the highest quality work?

Chhabria by far. And then I'd put Seeborg, Gilliam, and Tigar as the next tier.

Does this align with how competitive those clerkships are? Chhabria is obviously in a league of his own as a feeder. But what about the others?

Mostly aligned. Pitts is trying to get himself into that 2nd tier too (if not already there). And I would argue that Breyer is probably still in that 2nd tier.

[Anonymous User]

Which ND Cal judges tend to produce the highest quality work?

Chhabria by far. And then I'd put Seeborg, Gilliam, and Tigar as the next tier.

Does this align with how competitive those clerkships are? Chhabria is obviously in a league of his own as a feeder. But what about the others?

Mostly aligned. Pitts is trying to get himself into that 2nd tier too (if not already there). And I would argue that Breyer is probably still in that 2nd tier.

Thanks! Those three on Oscar say they accept top 20-25%. Is it fair to say that it’s possible to get those clerkships without being magna from a T-14? Or are the postings just being generous?

[Anonymous User]

Which ND Cal judges tend to produce the highest quality work?

Chhabria by far. And then I'd put Seeborg, Gilliam, and Tigar as the next tier.

Does this align with how competitive those clerkships are? Chhabria is obviously in a league of his own as a feeder. But what about the others?

Mostly aligned. Pitts is trying to get himself into that 2nd tier too (if not already there). And I would argue that Breyer is probably still in that 2nd tier.

Thanks! Those three on Oscar say they accept top 20-25%. Is it fair to say that it’s possible to get those clerkships without being magna from a T-14? Or are the postings just being generous?

They are just being generous, though not impossible either of course.

[Anonymous User]

Miller cares little if anything about Fed Soc when hiring clerks.

Has Miller fed any clerks to SCOTUS? I know he has become a very coveted clerkship and hires top HYSC students but was wondering whether he has or is expected to feed. Not sure if his alignment (too liberal for the conservative justices, too conservative for the liberal justices) hurts his chances.

[Anonymous User]

Miller cares little if anything about Fed Soc when hiring clerks.

Has Miller fed any clerks to SCOTUS? I know he has become a very coveted clerkship and hires top HYSC students but was wondering whether he has or is expected to feed. Not sure if his alignment (too liberal for the conservative justices, too conservative for the liberal justices) hurts his chances.

Miller hasn't fed to my knowledge and isn't likely to feed much if any. the sorts of people he hires--very strong applicants who are not Fed Soc, not liberal activists, and not Sears Prize winners--are not the hot commodity at SCOTUS right now or for the foreseeable future.

[Anonymous User]

Any pre-plan movement from CA9 COA judges?

[Anonymous User]

Any pre-plan movement from CA9 COA judges?

Looks like Koh and McKeown are already filled per Oscar.

[plong]

Any updates on any of the 9th circuit judges whose apps have not filled?

[Anonymous User]

Any movement from Sung?

[ck1249]

Any updates on any of the 9th circuit judges whose apps have not filled?

OSCAR shows Sanchez, McKeown, Johnstone, S. Thomas, and Koh as recently filled for 26-27. I'd assume most who are on OSCAR are already interviewing?