United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Third Circuit
Court of Appeals
Judgeships
Posts: 14
Judges: 13
Vacancies: 1
Judges
Chief: Michael Chagares
Active judges: Stephanos Bibas, Emil Bove, Michael Chagares, Cindy Chung, Arianna Freeman, Thomas Hardiman, Cheryl Ann Krause, Paul Matey, Tamika Montgomery-Reeves, Peter Phipps, David Porter, Luis Felipe Restrepo, Patty Shwartz Senior judges: Thomas Ambro, Robert Cowen, D. Michael Fisher, Julio Fuentes, Theodore McKee, Richard Nygaard, Marjorie Rendell, Jane Roth, Anthony Scirica, David Brooks Smith, Walter Stapleton

The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is a federal appellate court with appellate jurisdiction. It hears appeals from all of the circuit courts within its jurisdiction and its rulings may be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Appeals are heard in the James A. Byrne Federal Courthouse in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. It shares a courthouse with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

One judge of the Third Circuit went on to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States. Samuel Alito was appointed to the Supreme Court in 2006 by George W. Bush (R).

This page contains the following information on the Third Circuit.

• An overview of the court's jurisdiction
• A list of the court's active and senior judges
• A list of the court's current vacancies
• A brief history of the court
• Case reversal statistics by the Supreme Court of the United States
• Noteworthy cases heard by the court
• A list of the court's former judges
• Information about U.S. Courts of Appeals
• Where the court is located

Vacancies

See also: Current federal judicial vacancies

There is one current vacancy on the Third Circuit, out of the court's 14 authorized judicial posts.

Pending nominations

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
Jennifer Mascott	Donald Trump (R)

Active judges

Article III judges

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
Michael Chagares	George W. Bush (R)	April 20, 2006 -	Gettysburg College, 1984	Seton Hall University School of Law, 1987
Thomas Hardiman	George W. Bush (R)	April 2, 2007 -	University of Notre Dame, 1987	Georgetown University Law Center, 1990
Patty Shwartz	Barack Obama (D)	April 10, 2013 -	Rutgers University, 1983	University of Pennsylvania Law School, 1986
Cheryl Ann Krause	Barack Obama (D)	July 9, 2014 -	University of Pennsylvania, 1989	Stanford Law School, 1993
Luis Felipe Restrepo	Barack Obama (D)	January 13, 2016 -	University of Pennsylvania, 1981	Tulane University Law School, 1986
Stephanos Bibas	Donald Trump (R)	November 20, 2017 -	Columbia University, 1989	Yale Law School, 1994
David Porter	Donald Trump (R)	October 15, 2018 -	Grove City College, 1988	George Mason University, Antonin Scalia Law School, 1992
Paul Matey	Donald Trump (R)	March 18, 2019 -	University of Scranton, 1993	Seton Hall University School of Law, 2001
Peter Phipps	Donald Trump (R)	July 17, 2019 -	University of Dayton, 1995	Stanford Law School, 1998
Arianna Freeman	Joe Biden (D)	October 20, 2022 -	Swarthmore College, 2001	Yale Law School, 2007
Tamika Montgomery-Reeves	Joe Biden (D)	February 7, 2023 -	University of Mississippi	University of Georgia School of Law
Cindy Chung	Joe Biden (D)	February 21, 2023 -	Yale University, 1997	Columbia Law School, 2002
Emil Bove	Donald Trump (R)	August 20, 2025 -

Active Article III judges by appointing political party

Below is a display of the number of active judges by the party of the appointing president. It does not reflect how a judge may rule on specific cases or their own political preferences.

• Democratic appointed: 6
• Republican appointed: 7

Senior judges

Senior status is a classification for federal judges at all levels who are semi-retired. Senior judges are Article III judges who, having met eligibility through age and service requirements, continue to serve on federal courts while typically hearing a reduced number of cases. Some senior judges, however, elect to retain a full caseload after taking senior status. According to the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts, senior judges "typically handle about 15 percent of the federal courts' workload annually." The date listed under assumed office in the table below reflects the date that the judge took senior status.

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
Robert Cowen	Ronald Reagan (R)	September 4, 1998 -	Drake University, 1952	Rutgers University School of Law, 1958
Walter Stapleton	Richard Nixon (R)	June 2, 1999 -	Princeton University, 1956	Harvard Law School, 1959
Richard Nygaard	Ronald Reagan (R)	July 9, 2005 -	University of Southern California, 1969	University of Michigan Law, 1971
Jane Roth	George H.W. Bush (R)	May 31, 2006 -	Smith College, 1956	Harvard Law School, 1965
Anthony Scirica	Ronald Reagan (R)	July 1, 2013 -	Wesleyan University, 1962	University of Michigan Law School, 1965
Marjorie Rendell	Bill Clinton (D)	July 1, 2015 -	University of Pennsylvania, 1969	Villanova University School of Law, 1973
Julio Fuentes	Bill Clinton (D)	July 18, 2016 -	Southern Illinois University, 1971	State University of New York, Buffalo School of Law, 1975
D. Michael Fisher	George W. Bush (R)	February 1, 2017 -	Georgetown University, 1966	Georgetown University Law Center, 1969
David Brooks Smith		December 4, 2021 -	Franklin and Marshall College, 1973	Dickinson School of Law, 1976
Theodore McKee		October 20, 2022 -	State University of New York, Cortland, 1969	Syracuse University College of Law, 1975
Thomas Ambro	Bill Clinton (D)	February 6, 2023 -	Georgetown University, 1971	Georgetown University Law Center, 1975

Senior judges by appointing political party

Below is a display of the number of senior judges by the party of the appointing president. It does not reflect how a judge may rule on specific cases or their own political preferences.

• Democratic appointed: 4
• Republican appointed: 7

Former judges

For more information on former judges, see former federal judges of the Third Circuit.

Jurisdiction

Map of the Third Circuit. Click on a district to find out more about it.

The Third Circuit has appellate jurisdiction over cases heard in one of its subsidiary districts. These cases can include civil and criminal matters that fall under federal law. Appeals of rulings by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals are petitioned to the Supreme Court of the United States. Justice Samuel Alito is the circuit justice for the Third Circuit.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has appellate jurisdiction over the United States district court in the following federal judicial districts:

• District of Delaware
• District of New Jersey
• Eastern District of Pennsylvania
• Middle District of Pennsylvania
• Western District of Pennsylvania

It also has appellate jurisdiction over the United States District Court for the U.S. Virgin Islands which, in spite of the name, is a territorial court and belongs to no federal judicial district.

Caseloads

This section contains court management statistics dating back to 2010. It was last updated in September 2024. Click [show] below for more information on caseload terms and definitions.

Caseload statistics explanation
Term	Explanation
Cases filed and terminated	The number of civil and criminal lawsuits formally initiated or decided by the court in a calendar year. The chart below reflects the table columns Cases filed and Cases terminated.
Average time from filing to disposition	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to date of disposition (acquittal, sentencing, dismissal, etc.). The chart below reflects the table columns Median time (Criminal) and Median time (Civil).
Starting case load	The number of cases pending from the previous calendar year.
Cases filed	The number of civil and criminal lawsuits formally initiated in a calendar year.
Cases terminated	The total number of civil and criminal lawsuits decided by the court in a calendar year.
Remaining cases	The number of civil and criminal cases pending at the end of a given year.
Median time (Criminal)	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to the date of disposition. In criminal cases, the date of disposition occurs on the day of sentencing or acquittal/dismissal.
Median time (Civil)	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to the date of disposition.
Three-year civil cases	The number and percent of civil cases that were filed more than three years before the end of the given calendar year.
Vacant posts	The number of months during the year an authorized judgeship was vacant.
Trial/Post	The number of trials completed divided by the number of authorized judgeships on the court. Trials include evidentiary trials, hearings on temporary restraining orders, and preliminary injunctions.
Source: United States Courts, "Explanation of the Judicial Caseload Profiles for United States District Courts," accessed September 25, 2018

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit caseload stats, 2010-2023
Year	Appeals Filed	Appeals Terminated	Pending Appeals	Terminations on the Merits (per Active Judge)	Procedural Terminations (per Active Judge)	Total Written Decisions (per Active Judge)	Number of Judgeships	Number of Sitting Senior Judges	Number of Vacant Judgeship Months	Median Time From Filing Notice of Appeal to Disposition
2010	3,885	4,252	2,894	428	147	144	14	9	5	12
2011	3,722	4,158	2,434	442	113	133	14	10	6	9
2012	3,699	3,691	2,419	440	55	141	14	10	12	8
2013	3,910	4,214	2,099	590	76	192	14	12	16	6
2014	3,962	3,262	2,809	427	51	147	14	11	6	7
2015	3,216	3,380	2,645	318	43	108	14	10	18	8
2016	3,544	3,289	2,898	393	52	139	14	11	18	7
2017	2,936	3,639	2,196	465	49	124	14	9	35	11
2018	2,930	2,713	2,414	321	49	104	14	10	21	8
2019	3,609	3,674	2,350	512	49	140	14	9	14	10
2020	2,728	2,890	2,187	352	47	113	14	8	0	9
2021	2,550	2,691	2,046	309	46	100	14	9	1	9
2022	2,567	2,595	2,016	316	51	105	14	9	1	9
2023	2,373	2,510	1,879	273	40	86	14	10	3	8
Average	3,259	3,354	2,378	399	62	127	14	10	11	9

History

Court history

The Third Circuit was established by the United States Congress in 1891 with the Evarts Act of 1891, which established the first nine appeals circuits. Over the years, twelve additional seats were added to the court resulting in a total of fourteen seats.

Judicial posts

The following table highlights the development of judicial posts for the Third Circuit:

Year	Statute	Total Seats
March 3, 1891	26 Stat. 826	2
February 23, 1899	30 Stat. 846	3
June 10, 1930	46 Stat. 538	4
June 24, 1936	49 Stat. 1903	5
December 7, 1944	58 Stat. 796	6
August 3, 1949	63 Stat. 493	7
May 19, 1961	75 Stat. 80	8
June 18, 1968	82 Stat. 184	9
October 20, 1978	92 Stat. 1629	10
July 10, 1984	98 Stat. 333	12
December 1, 1990	104 Stat. 5089	14

Reversal rate

See also: SCOTUS case reversal rates (2007 - Present)

Since 2007, SCOTUS has released opinions in 1,313 cases. Of those, it reversed a lower court decision 938 times (71.4 percent) while affirming a lower court decision 363 times (27.6 percent).

In that time period, SCOTUS has decided 57 cases originating from the Third Circuit, affirming in 18 cases and reversing in 39 cases, for a reversal rate of 68.4 percent. As of the end of the 2023 term, of the Article III circuits—the ordinal circuits, the D.C. Circuit, and the Federal Circuit—the court with the lowest rate of overturned decisions is the Fourth Circuit at 62.1 percent.

Noteworthy cases

The following are noteworthy cases heard before this court. To suggest cases we should cover here, email us. To read opinions published by this court, click here.

• Dismissal of suit over mandatory retirement age for PA judges affirmed (2014)      Judge(s):Thomas Ambro, Kent Jordan, and Jane Roth (Lerner, at al v. Corbett, et al, 13-4184)	Click for summary→
On April 29, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit composed of Judges Thomas Ambro, Kent Jordan, and Senior Judge Jane Roth, upheld a decision rendered by Judge John E. Jones, III of the Middle District of Pennsylvania to dismiss a suit brought by a group of Pennsylvania judges challenging the state's retirement age law. In the underlying case, the plaintiffs alleged that their forced retirement at the age of 70 was based on preconceived notions of senior citizens’ deteriorating cognitive abilities, relying heavily on the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Judge Jones found those arguments "unconvincing," further noting that the plaintiffs did not have a due process claim as they did not have a constitutionally protected property interest in continued judicial employment. In an opinion written by Judge Ambro, the plaintiff judges' claims were again rebuked, with Ambro stating that their Fourteenth Amendment rights had not been violated. Judge Ambro found that the plaintiffs' claims that opinions reached in United States v. Windsor and Shelby County v. Holder served as intervening authority failed as a matter of law.

• Computer hacker's conviction and sentence vacated for lack of proper venue (2014)      Judge(s):Joseph Greenaway, Thomas Vanaskie, and Michael Chagares (U.S. v. Auernheimer, 13-1816)	Click for summary→
On April 11, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit, composed of Judges Joseph Greenaway, Thomas Vanaskie, and Michael Chagares, vacated a hacker's conviction and prison sentence on charges relating to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). In the underlying case, in June 2010, Andrew “weev” Auernheimer and co-conspirator Daniel Spiller discovered a security flaw on AT&T's network server that allowed them to obtain the email addresses of 114,000 iPad users. Auernheimer emailed the details of their find to several media outlets, and shared the full list of emails generated with a writer from Gawker, a news and gossip website. While Auernheimer resided in Arkansas and the servers affected were located in Texas and Georgia, he was prosecuted in New Jersey federal court, which Auernheimer argued was an improper venue under the circumstances. The District of New Jersey rationalized this course of action by saying that the email addresses of 4,500 New Jersey residents appeared on Auernheimer's list. In 2012, a jury convicted Auernheimer of identity fraud and conspiracy to access a computer without authorization, and in March 2013, he was sentenced by Judge Susan Wigenton to forty-one months in prison. On appeal to the Third Circuit, the three-judge panel found that Auernheimer's conviction must be vacated because of improper venue. Writing for the court in a precedential decision, Judge Chagares noted that New Jersey was "not the site of either essential conduct element" of the CFAA -- Auernheimer neither accessed nor obtained the unauthorized information in the state at any time. Chagares continued, writing: “ [E]ven assuming that defective venue could be amenable to harmless error review, the venue error here clearly affected Auernheimer’s substantial rights. ... The venue error in this case is not harmless because there was no evidence that any of the essential conduct elements occurred in New Jersey. If Auernheimer’s jury had been properly instructed on venue, it could not have returned a guilty verdict; the verdict rendered in this trial would have been different. ” Auernheimer was released after having spent thirteen months in prison.

• Judges agree that non-fiction book about known affair isn't defamatory (2014)      Judge(s):Thomas Ambro, Michael Fisher, and Thomas Hardiman (Crecenz v. Penguin Group, Inc.; Capuzzo, 13-1242)	Click for summary→
On March 26, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit, composed of Judges Thomas Ambro, Michael Fisher, and Thomas Hardiman, ruled that a non-fiction book was not defamatory even though it addressed a married woman's affair with her boss. In the underlying case, Penguin Group published a book written by Michael Capuzzo called "The Murder Room: The Heirs of Sherlock Holmes Gather to Solve the World's Most Perplexing Cold Cases," in August 2010. The book recounted the work of the Vidocq Society, a Philadelphia-based forensic group, and its founding member, Frank Bender. Bender's assistant, Joan Crecenz, filed a lawsuit in 2011, alleging that she was defamed and suffered false light invasion of privacy as a result of Capuzzo's "reckless casting" of her as one of her boss's "girlfriends." During the course of the litigation, however, additional facts were disclosed concerning Crecenz's sexual relationship with Bender, and Judge Noel Hillman of the District of New Jersey awarded summary judgment to Penguin Group and Capuzzo. Crecenz appealed to the Third Circuit, which affirmed the ruling. Judge Hardiman, on behalf of the majority, wrote: “ [W]e agree with the District Court that summary judgmentis appropriate because Capuzzo possessed overwhelming evidence of a sexual relationship between Bender and Crescenz, and because Crescenz has failed to refute that evidence. Even if a jury could credit Crescenz’s testimony and find the allegations of a sexual relationship false, no reasonable jury could find that Capuzzo was negligent in ascertaining the truth of his statements. Accordingly, the District Court did not err in granting summary judgment to Capuzzo on Crescenz’s defamation claim. ”

• FBI's racial profiling records kept under wraps (2013)      Judge(s):D. Brooks Smith, Dolores Sloviter, and Jane Roth (ACLU of New Jersey v. FBI, DOJ, 12-4345)	Click for summary→
On October 23, 2013, in a precedential opinion, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit, composed of Judge D. Brooks Smith and Senior Judges Dolores Sloviter and Jane Roth, found that documents requested by the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey (ACLU) from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request were properly withheld. In the underlying case, the ACLU filed a FOIA request seeking access to records concerning the "FBI's use of ethnic and racial data" in its "limited racial and ethnic profiling" as authorized by the 9/11 Commission's final report. The FBI identified 782 pages of documents related to the ACLU's request, but released only 312 pages, citing 186 pages as duplicative and 284 pages as exempt from disclosure. The ACLU filed suit in May 2011, seeking access to all of the documents identified by the FBI. Citing several exemptions to FOIA rules, the FBI filed a motion for summary judgment. This prompted the ACLU to file a cross-motion for summary judgment, requesting that presiding Judge Esther Salas of the District of New Jersey review the documents privately. The ACLU further requested that Salas use a "Glomar-like" procedure in chambers. Judge Salas refused, and granted the FBI's motion for summary judgment. The ACLU filed an appeal. Writing for three-judge panel of the Third Circuit, Judge Smith rejected the ACLU's "novel [Glomarization] proposal," and stated that "ample evidence" was available in support of Judge Salas' decision. Smith further noted that it would be "hard to imagine how the FBI could provide a more detailed justification for withholding information under this exemption without compromising the very information it sought to protect."

Before the U.S. Supreme Court

This section focuses on cases the U.S. Supreme Court heard that originated in this court. To suggest cases we should cover here, email us.

2025-2026 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2025-2026

The following cases were scheduled for argument before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2025-2026 term.

2025-2026 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 3rd Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Berk v. Choy	TBD	TBD	TBD
Rutherford v. United States	TBD	TBD	TBD
First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Platkin	TBD	TBD	TBD

2024-2025 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2024-2025

The following cases were heard for argument before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2024-2025 term.

2024-2025 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 3rd Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Kousisis v. United States	Amy Coney Barrett	affirmed	9-0
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Zuch	Amy Coney Barrett	reversed and remanded	8-1

2023-2024 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2023-2024

The following cases were heard for argument before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2023-2024 term.

2023-2024 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 3rd Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Brown v. United States (Consolidated with Jackson v. United States)	Samuel Alito	affirmed	6-3
Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co., LLC	Brett Kavanaugh	reversed	9-0
Wilkinson v. Garland	Sonia Sotomayor	reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded	6-3
Department of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Service v. Kirtz	Neil Gorsuch	affirmed	9-0

2022-2023 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2022-2023

The following cases were heard for argument before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2022-2023 term.

2022-2023 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 3rd Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
United States, ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc.	Elena Kagan	affirmed	8-1
Groff v. DeJoy	Samuel Alito	vacated and remanded	9-0

2021-2022 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2021-2022

The following cases were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2021-2022 term.

2021-2022 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 3rd Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez	Sonia Sotomayor	reversed and remanded	8-1

2020-2021 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2020-2021

The following cases were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2020-2021 term.

2020-2021 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 3rd Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania	Chief Justice John Roberts	reversed and remanded	9-0
Carney v. Adams	Stephen Breyer	vacated and remanded	8-0
FCC v. Prometheus Radio Project (Consolidated with National Association of Broadcasters v. Prometheus Radio Project)	Brett Kavanaugh	reversed	9-0
Sanchez v. Mayorkas	Elena Kagan	affirmed	9-0
Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.	Stephen Breyer	affirmed	8-1
PennEast Pipeline Co. v. New Jersey	John Roberts	reversed and remanded	5-4

2019-2020 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2019-2020

The following cases were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2019-2020 term.

2019-2020 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 3rd Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Rotkiske v. Klemm	Clarence Thomas	affirmed	8-1
CITGO Asphalt Refining Co. v. Frescati Shipping Co., Ltd.	Sonia Sotomayor	affirmed	7-2
Kelly v. United States	Elena Kagan	reversed and remanded	9-0
Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania (Consolidated with Trump v. Pennsylvania)	Clarence Thomas	reversed and remanded	7-2

Former judges

Former chief judges

In order to qualify for the office of chief judge in an Article III circuit or district court, or on the United States Court of International Trade, a judge must be in active service and hold seniority over the court's commissioned judges who are 64 years of age or under, have served one year or more, and have not previously served as chief judge.

In the event that no judge on the court meets those qualifications, the youngest judge in regular active service aged 65 years or more and who has served as a judge for one year or more shall become chief judge. If no judge meets those qualifications, the judge holding seniority in active service who has not served as chief before shall become the chief judge.

The chief judge serves for a term of seven years until another judge becomes eligible to serve in the position. No judge is permitted to serve as chief judge after reaching the age of 70 years unless no other judge is qualified to serve.

Unlike the chief justice of the United States, a chief judge returns to active service after the expiration of their term and does not create a vacancy on the court by the fact of their promotion.

On the United States Court of Federal Claims, the chief judge is selected by the president of the United States. The judge must be less than 70 years of age. A chief may serve until they reach age 70 or until another judge is designated by the president as the new chief judge. If the president selects a new chief judge, the former chief judge may continue active service on the court for the remainder of their appointed term.

Brooks Smith - (2016-2021) Theodore McKee - (2010-2016) Anthony Scirica - (2003-2010) Edward Becker - (1998-2003) Dolores Sloviter - (1991-1998) Aloysius Higginbotham - (1990-1991)

John Gibbons (Third Circuit) - (1987-1990) Ruggero Aldisert - (1984-1986) Collins Seitz - (1971-1984) William Hastie - (1968-1971) Austin Staley - (1966-1967) Harry Kalodner - (1965-1966) John Biggs - (1948-1965)

Federal courthouse

The Third Circuit shares the James A. Byrne Federal Courthouse with the Eastern District of Pennsylvania located in Center City Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The courthouse was designed by LZA Technology and opened in 1975 as part of the Bicentennial of the Declaration of Independence celebration.

About United States Courts of Appeals

The United States courts of appeals (or circuit courts) are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States federal courts. The court of appeals was originally created in 1891 and has grown to include thirteen courts.

A court of appeals decides appeals from any of the district courts that are in its federal judicial circuit. The appeals courts also can hear appeals from some administrative agencies. Decisions of the federal appeals courts can, in turn, be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States.

There are thirteen United States courts of appeals. In addition, there are other federal courts (such as the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, which hears appeals in court-martial cases) that have "Court of Appeals" in their titles.

The eleven numbered circuits and the D.C. Circuit are defined by geography. The thirteenth court of appeal is the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. This court has nationwide jurisdiction over certain types of appeals based on what the underlying legal case is about.

All of the courts of appeals also hear appeals from some administrative agency decisions and rulemaking. The largest share of this type of case is heard by the D.C. Circuit. The Federal Circuit hears appeals from specialized trial courts, primarily the Court of International Trade and the Court of Federal Claims, as well as appeals from the district courts in patent cases and certain other specialized matters.

Federal circuit court judges are appointed for life. They are paid approximately $179,500 annually. At the age of 65, a federal judge may choose to retire with his or her full salary. Judges may also choose to go on senior status at age 65, if they have served actively for 15 years.

Appointments by president

The chart below shows the number of appeals court judges confirmed by the U.S. Senate through September 1 of the first year of each president's second term in office. At this point in the term, Presidents Obama had the most appeals court appointments with 8.

Judges by circuit

See also: Judicial vacancies in federal courts

The table below displays the number of judges in each circuit and indicates how many were appointed by presidents from each major political party. It also includes the number of vacancies on a circuit and how many pending nominations for that circuit are before the United States Senate. The table can be sorted by clicking the column headers above the line. It is updated every Monday.

See also

• Federal courts
• Federal judge
• United States Court of Appeals
• District of Delaware
• District of New Jersey
• Eastern District of Pennsylvania
• Middle District of Pennsylvania
• Western District of Pennsylvania

External links

• Official Website of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals
• List of Third Circuit Judges
• Opinions of the Third Circuit
• Federal Judicial Center - About the Third Circuit