Findings and Conclusions by the

Court; Judgment on Partial Findings (a) Findings and Conclusions. (1) In General. In an action tried on the facts, the court must find the facts specially and state its conclusions of law separately. The findings and conclusions may be stated on the record after the close of the evidence or may appear in an opinion or a memorandum of decision filed by the court. Judgment must be entered under RCFC 58. (2) For an Interlocutory Injunction. In granting or refusing an interlocutory injunction, the court must similarly state the findings and conclusions that support its action. (3) For a Motion. The court is not required to state findings or conclusions when ruling on a motion under RCFC 12 or 56 or, unless these rules provide otherwise, on any other motion. (4) Effect of a Master’s Findings. [Not used.] (5) Questioning the Evidentiary Support. A party may later question the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the findings, whether or not the party requested findings, objected to them, moved to amend them, or moved for partial findings. (6) Setting Aside the Findings. Findings of fact, whether based on oral or other evidence, must not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and the reviewing court must give due regard to the trial the court’s opportunity witnesses’ credibility. judge to (b) Amended or Additional Findings. On a party’s motion filed no later than 30 days after the entry of judgment, the court may amend its findings—or make additional findings—and may amend the judgment accordingly. The motion may accompany a motion for a new trial under RCFC 59. (c) Judgment on Partial Findings. If a party has been fully heard on an issue during trial and the court finds against the party on that issue, the court may enter judgment against the party on a claim or defense that, under the controlling law, can be maintained or defeated only with a favorable finding on that issue. The court may, however, decline to render any judgment until the close of the evidence. A judgment on partial findings must be supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by RCFC 52(a). (As revised and reissued May 1, 2002; as amended Nov. 3, 2008, Jan. 11, 2010.) Rules Committee Notes 2002 Revision The principal change in RCFC 52 relates to the enlargement of subdivision (c) to include, among issues subject to judgment on partial findings, the adjudication of issues critical to the legal sufficiency of a “defense.” The amendment makes clear that judgments as a matter of law may be entered against both plaintiffs and defendants and with respect to issues or defenses that may not be wholly dispositive of a claim or defense. 71 RCFC 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 and 52 Rules Committee Notes 2006 Adoption RCFC 52.1 has no FRCP counterpart. The rule replaces an earlier rule, RCFC 56.1, that applied certain standards borrowed from the procedure for summary judgment to review of an agency decision on the basis of an administrative record. That incorporation proved to be confusing in practice because only a portion of the summary judgment standards were borrowed. Summary judgment standards are not pertinent to judicial review upon an administrative record. See Bannum, Inc. v. United States, 404 F.3d 1346, 1355–57 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Specifically, the now- repealed Rule 56.1 did not adopt the overall standard that summary judgment might be appropriate where there were no genuine issues of material fact. See RCFC 56(c). Nonetheless, despite this omission, parties, in moving for judgment on the administrative record under the prior rule, frequently would contest whether the administrative record showed the existence of a genuine dispute of material fact. To avoid this confusion, the new rule omits any reference to summary judgment or to the standards applicable to summary judgment. Cases filed in this court frequently turn only in part on action taken by an administrative agency. In such cases, the administrative record may provide a factual and procedural predicate for a portion of the court’s decision, while other elements might be derived from a trial, an evidentiary hearing, or summary judgment or other judicial proceedings. This rule applies whether the court’s decision is derived in whole or in part from the agency action reflected in the administrative record. The standards and criteria governing the court’s review of agency decisions vary depending upon the specific law to be applied in particular cases. The rule does not address those standards or criteria. Correspondingly, any motion for correction or supplementation of the administrative record should be made on the basis of either the specific law to be applied in the particular case or generally applicable principles of administrative law. 2008 Amendment The language of RCFC 52 has been amended to conform to the general restyling of the FRCP. 2010 Amendment RCFC 52(b) has been amended to change the period for filing a post-judgment motion from 10 to 30 days in accordance with the corresponding change to FRCP 52(b) that became effective December 1, 2009. RCFC 6(b) continues to prohibit any extension of the time allowed under this rule.