WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HR 9295

Stop Serial Litigation Act of 2026

119th Congress Introduced by Michael Rulli

The bill caps fees and other expenses recoverable in federal agency adjudications, limiting how much prevailing parties can be reimbursed.

Introduced in House
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HR 9295

Summary of HR 9295 (119th Congress)

Purpose and intent

HR 9295 seeks to reform the awarding of fees and other expenses in connection with agency adjudications within the federal civil service and federal court framework. The core aim is to establish a maximum monetary limit on the amounts that may be awarded for fees and other expenses, thereby limiting potential reimbursements to prevailing parties in agency adjudication proceedings. The bill also indicates additional provisions “and for other purposes,” suggesting broader adjustments related to agency adjudication processes beyond the fee cap.

Key provisions and changes

  • Capping of fees and expenses in agency adjudications

    • Establishes a maximum amount that may be awarded for fees and other expenses in connection with an agency adjudication.
    • Applies to the adjudicatory processes conducted under the specified titles of the U.S. Code (see below for scope).

  • Codification references

    • Amends:
    • Chapter 5 of Title 5, United States Code (which covers administrative procedure; generally related to employee rights, appeals, and related procedures in federal agencies).
    • Chapter 161 of Title 28, United States Code (which governs the Judiciary and may include provisions related to federal adjudication, fee shifting, and related procedures in federal courts).

  • Other purposes

    • The bill’s language hints at additional adjustments related to agency adjudication procedures, though specifics beyond the fee cap are not detailed in the provided summary.

Who or what would be affected

  • Federal agencies administering adjudications (as governed by Title 5 and related federal procedures) would be impacted in terms of how much can be awarded to parties for fees and expenses.
  • Prevailing parties in agency adjudications could see a limitation on recoverable fees and costs, depending on how the maximum is set and applied.
  • Judicial and administrative processes linked to agency determinations that involve fee-award decisions would be affected by the amended provisions.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Introduced and referred
    • Introduced in the House and referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary on June 11, 2026.
  • Legislative status
    • As of the provided information, the bill has not progressed beyond referral to committee. Committee consideration, potential amendments, and subsequent votes would determine its advancement.
  • Sponsors and support
    • Primary sponsor: Representative (not named in the excerpt).
    • Co-sponsor: Michael Rulli.

Potential implications and considerations

  • Access to relief vs. cost containment
    • A maximum cap on fee reimbursements could influence the willingness of individuals or entities to pursue agency adjudication challenges if expected recoverable costs are constrained.
  • Administrative efficiency
    • By limiting fees, the bill may address concerns about escalating costs in administrative litigation, potentially reducing administrative burdens on agencies and the judiciary.
  • Complexity and scope
    • The exact definitions of “fees and other expenses” covered by the cap (e.g., attorney fees, expert costs, filing fees) and any exceptions (e.g., for bad-faith actions or superior court review) are not specified in the summary and would be critical to understanding practical impact.

If you’d like, I can pull the text of the bill to extract precise definitions, the calculable cap amount, any numbering of sections affected, and potential implementation timelines or sunset provisions.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.