Employee and Former Employee

(a) Restrictions on Practice. No employee of the court may engage in the practice of law. No former employee of the court may participate or assist, by representation, consultation, or otherwise, in any case that was pending in the court during the period of employment. (b) Requirements of Counsel. All counsel appearing in cases before the court are required to take reasonable steps to ensure compliance with this rule. See In re Violation of Rule 50, 712 F. App’x 1005 (Fed. Cir. 2018). (c) Employee Defined. For purposes of this rule, a person serving at the court as an intern, whether in a judge’s chambers or otherwise, is considered an employee of the court, whether such service is for pay, for law school credit, or voluntary. PRACTICE NOTES TO RULE 50 All Future Participation and Assistance Prohibited. A former employee of the court is prohibited from participating or assisting in any case after employment with the court if the case was before this court at any point during the person’s employment. Thus, for example, a former employee is prohibited from participating or assisting in a case in a trial forum, agency, or other forum if the case was before this court during the person’s employment and was remanded by this court or otherwise continued in the trial forum, agency, or other forum for any other reason. A former employee is also prohibited, for example, from participating or assisting in the case if it is subsequently before this court again or if it is before the Supreme Court of the United States. In addition to Federal Circuit Rule 50, former employees should also consult any applicable local bar rules and Canon 3(d) of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Employees. Federal Circuit Rules of Practice (December 1, 2025) Page 209 (Return to Table of Contents) PRACTICE NOTES TO RULE 50 Cases Pending List A court employee is provided the full list of pending cases that the employee may not participate in or assist with under Rule 50 after employment at the court (“Appeals Pending List”). Employers and former employees are expected to use that Appeals Pending List to comply with Rule 50. See In re Violation of Rule 50, 712 F. App’x 1005, 1007 (Fed. Cir. 2018). An employer or potential employer should not request a former or current court employee to disclose the actual cases the employee worked on while at the court, and the employee should not identify such cases to the employer or potential employer. See Committee on Codes of Conduct Advisory Opinion No. 109 (“[J]udges and clerks should generally decline law firms’ requests for lists of all matters the clerks participated in, because such requests may call for the disclosure of confidential information[.]”); Canon 3D(3) of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Employees (“A judicial employee should never disclose any confidential information received in the course of official duties except as required in the performance of such duties. A former judicial employee should observe the same restriction on disclosure of confidential information that applies to a current judicial employee, except as modified by the appointing authority.”). Other sources of ethical obligations, outside the scope of this Practice Note, might be relevant former court employee’s and an employer’s representation on a particular matter and might extend to cases beyond those on the Appeals Pending List. This Practice Note does not attempt to define those other ethical obligations or to address mechanisms for compliance with those obligations. to a Federal Circuit Rules of Practice (December 1, 2025) Page 210 (Return to Table of Contents)