This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
The petitioner argues that the Judiciary Act of 1789 provides a right of appeal from a final judgment.
According to MR. SIMPSON, the petitioner says the case was consolidated for both pre‑trial and trial purposes, which under the Third Circuit definition means consolidation for all purposes.
The petitioner contends that Rule 23(f) gives appellate courts discretion to hear interlocutory appeals.
The court may direct entry of a final judgment as to one or more, but fewer than all, claims or parties under Rule 54(b).
According to Mr. Katyal, the respondent argues that the district court entered an order consolidating the sibling cases and that the petitioner seeks to appeal part of its claims now.
Background and question before the Court
According to Mr. Katyal, the district court entered an order consolidating the cases brought by brother and sister for all purposes.
When an action presents more than one claim or multiple parties, the court may direct entry of a final judgment as to one or more, but fewer than all.
According to Mr. Katyal, the petitioner seeks to appeal part of its claims despite the consolidation order.
What each side argues
Petitioner
According to Petitioner, there is a right of appeal from a final judgment under the Judiciary Act of 1789.
According to MR. SIMPSON, the case was consolidated for pre‑trial and trial purposes, which under the Third Circuit means consolidation for all purposes.
Respondent
According to Mr. Katyal, the district court entered an order consolidating the sibling cases, and the petitioner now seeks to appeal only part of its claims.
What happened at oral argument
Justice Sotomayor asked what the purpose of dividing a rule into two sections is.
Justice Ginsburg stated that the client had not brought a lawsuit with multiple claims.
Justice Kagan asked if the petitioner’s argument would also apply to a suit with five separate claims.
Justice Alito asked what the petitioner’s best procedural argument would be before the civil rules committee.
Justice Breyer asked for clarification on Rule 54(b)’s application to cases with many parties and issues.
Justice Sotomayor asked how the district court’s denial of attorneys’ fees within 15 days of the final judgment affects the case.
According to Chief Justice Roberts, chief Justice Roberts thanked counsel and noted that the case was submitted.
- [1] 0502c1e7caf0971e5556-r1-12d949bb6519a999.pdf, p. 5
- [2] 0502c1e7caf0971e5556-r1-12d949bb6519a999.pdf, p. 8
- [3] 0502c1e7caf0971e5556-r1-12d949bb6519a999.pdf, p. 9
- [4] 0502c1e7caf0971e5556-r1-12d949bb6519a999.pdf, p. 17
- [5] 0502c1e7caf0971e5556-r1-12d949bb6519a999.pdf, p. 26
- [6] 0502c1e7caf0971e5556-r1-12d949bb6519a999.pdf, p. 32
- [7] 0502c1e7caf0971e5556-r1-12d949bb6519a999.pdf, p. 68
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
- consolidation
- the court‑ordered unification of two or more actions into a single action.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- 0502c1e7caf0971e5556-r1-12d949bb6519a999.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 26, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.