The first Federal Rule focused specifically on multidistrict litigation—which has long been a staple of complex, high-stakes litigation—took effect on December 1, 2025, as part of the 2025 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16.1 is designed to provide a nationwide framework for initial management of MDL proceedings that tracks approaches judges have typically already followed in practice. Rule 16.1 directs a MDL transferee judge to schedule an initial case management conference—and the parties to meet and submit an initial case management report (with various topics either prescribed or suggested by Rule 16.1)—shortly after the MDL is formed.
Many of the new Rule’s directives appear aimed at avoiding case management inefficiencies that have plagued some prior MDLs. For example, Rule 16.1 encourages the parties to address “how and when the parties will exchange information about the factual bases for their claims and defenses.” And the Committee Notes accompanying Rule 16.1 describe how this directive is intended to obviate one concern with some MDL proceedings, which is that they may enable “some claims and defenses [to be] asserted without the inquiry called for by Rule 11(b).” (As a reminder, Rule 11(b) aims to prevent the assertion of factually or legally frivolous claims or defenses by requiring certification that the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions have factual and legal support.)
The Committee Notes also encourage the parties, and eventually the MDL court, to consider “whether there are issues that should be addressed early in the proceeding,” including issues often raised by defendants like jurisdiction, general causation, and preemption. Depending on the issues presented, “the court may conclude that certain factual issues should be pursued through early discovery” or “addressed through early motion practice.”
To these ends, Rule 16.1(b) encourages the parties to address in the initial MDL case management conference report their initial views on the following, in addition to any other matters the Court orders or the parties wish to address:
- Whether to require consolidated pleadings;
- A procedure for exchanging information about the factual bases for the parties’ claims and defenses;
- Any difficult discovery issues that may arise;
- Any likely pretrial motions;
- Any measures to facilitate resolving some or all actions before the court;
- Whether any matters should be referred to a magistrate judge or a master; and
- The principal factual and legal issues likely to be presented.
Rule 16.1(b) also requires the parties to address their views on (1) whether leadership counsel should be appointed (and if so, the procedure, timing, structure, and responsibilities of leadership counsel); (2) whether any previously entered orders should be vacated or modified; (3) a schedule for additional management conferences with the court; and (4) a procedure for the direct filing of new actions in the MDL and coordination with any other related actions.
The Rule still gives judges a lot of flexibility to manage MDL proceedings. While it remains to be seen what impact, if any, the new rule will have on MDL management in practice, Rule 16.1 offers companies facing MDLs a concrete, early procedure for bringing to the court’s attention potentially litigation-dispositive issues—and also procedures for ensuring cases filed or pending in the MDL have been appropriately vetted by plaintiffs’ counsel—before those issues might typically arise in the context of subsequent motions practice or far down the road in discovery.