Effective December 1, 2025, the Ninth Circuit rolled out a new local rules package and began operating under the latest Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (FRAP) amendments, including changes to FRAP 6 (bankruptcy appeals) and FRAP 39 (costs). For firms handling Ninth Circuit appeals, these changes affect deadlines, cost exposure, amicus filings, and sealing practice.
Below is a concise walkthrough of what’s changed, and how TypeLaw has already built those changes into our automated brief and appendix preparation workflows—so you don’t have to.
FRAP 6 changes: bankruptcy appeals now on the bankruptcy rules clock
The amended FRAP 6 clarifies how bankruptcy appeals interact with post-judgment motions and direct appeals:
- District courts sitting in bankruptcy: When a district court exercises original bankruptcy jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1334, the timing for tolling motions under FRAP 4(a)(4)(A) now tracks the shorter deadlines in the Bankruptcy Rules, not the longer Civil Rules timelines.
- Direct appeals from bankruptcy court (FRAP 6(c)): The rule has been overhauled so that procedures for direct appeals to the court of appeals are largely self-contained in FRAP 6 itself, instead of cross-referencing FRAP 5. As the American Association for Justice notes, the goal is less confusion and a clearer roadmap for requesting authorization under § 158(d)(2).
What this means in practice:
- Deadline calculations for bankruptcy appeals are now less forgiving if you mistakenly apply Civil Rule timing.
- Any Ninth Circuit matter that starts in a bankruptcy posture should be treated as being on the Bankruptcy Rules clock from the outset.
FRAP 39 changes: clarifying costs and allocation, codifying Hotels.com
Amended FRAP 39 tightens the connection between the court of appeals’ cost allocation and what happens when costs are taxed:
- Clear default allocations: FRAP 39(a) now spells out default cost allocations (dismissal, affirmance, reversal, mixed results) and clarifies that the court of appeals is allocating costs among the parties, not calculating dollar amounts. Mixed judgments default to each party bearing its own costs.
- New reconsideration mechanism: FRAP 39(b) now lets a party seek reconsideration of cost allocation in the court of appeals by motion filed within 14 days after judgment—without delaying the mandate. The court retains jurisdiction to decide the motion after the mandate issues.
- Codifying City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com, L.P.: FRAP 39(c) now makes explicit that the allocation made by the court of appeals governs both costs taxable in the court of appeals, and those taxable in the district court, implementing Hotels.com’s holding.
Client impact:
- Cost-shifting risk is now more predictable—and harder to undo at the district court after the fact.
- Any appeal-vs-settlement discussion should now treat the appellate court’s cost allocation as controlling for both levels of taxation.
Ninth Circuit local rules changes: amici, disclosures, and sealed documents
The Ninth Circuit’s December 2025 rule revisions focus on disclosure statements, amicus practice, sealed filings, and excerpts of record.
Form 34 disclosure now baked into amicus practice
Circuit Rule 26.1-1 (effective Dec. 1, 2024) introduced a Form 34 Disclosure Statement requirement for many parties, intervenors, and amici, and Form 34 must be filed separately from the brief using the “Disclosure Statement (CR 26.1-1)” filing type.
As of December 1, 2025, that framework is expressly tied into amicus rules:
- Circuit Rule 29-1 (merits stage): Amicus briefs filed with principal briefing are still governed by FRAP 29(a), but Ninth Circuit Rule 29-1 now requires a completed Form 34 disclosure statement (under Circuit Rule 26.1-1) to accompany the amicus brief.
- Circuit Rule 29-2 (rehearing stage): Amicus briefs supporting or opposing rehearing, or filed while rehearing is pending, also must include Form 34.
- Circuit Rule 29-3: The prohibition on amicus reply briefs has been moved into its own rule and now squarely states: “No reply brief of an amicus curiae is permitted under these rules.”
Takeaway: Every Ninth Circuit amicus brief—on the merits or at rehearing—should be treated as a “Form 34 + brief” package, and there is no amicus reply round.
Circuit Rule 27-13: sealed documents and fully sealed cases
Revised Circuit Rule 27-13 (Sealed Documents) tightens both terminology and procedure, with several provisions marked Rev. 12/1/25. Key revisions include the updated definition of a “sealed case” and clarified notice/motion procedures for maintaining sealed status on appeal.
Key elements:
- Presumption of public access: The rule opens by reaffirming a strong presumption that documents filed in the Ninth Circuit are public unless this Court orders otherwise. Cases fully sealed in the district court are only provisionally sealed when they arrive on appeal.
- “Sealed case” redefined: A sealed case is now expressly one where the public docket and filings are accessible only to case participants and the Court (i.e., no public access via PACER)—clarified in 27-13(b)(3) (Rev. 12/1/25).
- Statute- or rule-mandated sealing (Circuit Rule 27-13(d), Rev. 12/1/25): Where a statute or procedural rule requires filing under seal (e.g., certain juvenile or victim-related filings, grand jury materials, specific criminal statutes), the filer may file the document under seal without a motion, but must also submit a notice of filing under seal referencing Circuit Rule 27-13 and the relevant statute or rule, and attach a copy (with a narrow exception for presentence materials).
- Presentence reports: If a presentence report is referenced in a brief, the first party to do so must file the report, attachments, and sealed sentencing memoranda using the presentence-report event, not in the excerpts of record, and must notify opposing counsel of what was filed.
- Fully sealed cases on appeal: If the entire case was fully sealed in the district court, a party that wants the seal maintained must, within 21 days of filing the notice of appeal, either:
- file a motion to continue the seal, or
- file a notice referencing Rule 27-13 and the specific statute or rule, with an attached copy. Otherwise, the Ninth Circuit may lift the seal and make the case public.
The revised excerpts rule, Circuit Rule 30-1.4(d), now directly cross-references 27-13: sealed materials in the excerpts must be placed in separate sealed volumes, and presentence reports must never appear in the excerpts at all.
How TypeLaw has already implemented Ninth Circuit rule changes
Instead of handing you a new checklist and wishing you luck, TypeLaw has already folded these rules into our processes for formatting briefs and building excerpts.
FRAP engine refreshed for 2025 amendments
- TypeLaw’s internal rules library now treats bankruptcy appeals under FRAP 6 as running on Bankruptcy Rule deadlines when district courts exercise original bankruptcy jurisdiction, reducing the risk of mis-timed notices of appeal.
- Cost-related checks and templates now mirror FRAP 39’s allocation/taxation distinction and incorporate the Hotels.com framework when we flag costs language for appellate practitioners.
Ninth Circuit compliance baked into our quality controls
- Our Ninth Circuit workflows expect Form 34 with every required amicus brief (merits and rehearing), and our thorough review process flags missing or incomplete disclosure statements under Circuit Rules 26.1-1, 29-1, and 29-2.
- Sealed-filing and excerpts checklists now track the revised 27-13 and 30-1.4 requirements, including: separate sealed excerpt volumes, correct treatment of presentence materials, and the 21-day deadline to continue seals for cases fully sealed in the district court.
Consistent citation and formatting updates
- The same rule-tracking infrastructure we used to roll out Bluebook 22nd Edition support—including AI and social media sources, new tables, and updated abbreviations—now underpins our FRAP and local-rule updates, so changes in any one source propagate cleanly across our platform.
For TypeLaw clients and potential clients, the upshot is simple: you don’t need to re-engineer your own templates and checklists to keep up with the Ninth Circuit’s December 2025 package. If you send your Ninth Circuit briefs and excerpts to TypeLaw, you’re already drafting and filing against the current FRAP, the updated Circuit Rules, and the Ninth Circuit 2026 sitting calendar.
Preparing Ninth Circuit filings with ease
If you have a Ninth Circuit appeal (or a bankruptcy matter that may go there next), loop TypeLaw in early. We’ll automatically structure your brief, excerpts, and sealed filings to align with the new rules—so you can stay focused on the merits. And with our unparalleled same-day service, we can help you meet even the toughest filing deadlines.
