Promptu Sys. Corp. v. Comcast Cable Commc’ns, LLC

Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky

In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit sent a clear message to attorneys: you can’t get around word limits by “incorporating by reference” arguments from one legal brief into another. This issue came up when Comcast’s legal team tried to add nearly 2,000 words from a different case’s brief into their response, which would have put them well over the allowed word count. The court wasn’t amused and pointed out that this tactic is both unfair to the other side and an inefficient use of the court’s time.

The court emphasized that its rules—and prior decisions—are clear: each brief must stand on its own, and word limits matter. Incorporating arguments from other briefs to get around these limits is not allowed. Even though Comcast’s lawyers argued they were just trying to be efficient, the court disagreed, noting that making judges hunt through multiple documents actually wastes time rather than saves it.

Interestingly, the court accepted that Comcast’s lawyers may not have realized they were breaking the rules, even though their own law firm had been warned about this exact issue in a previous case. While the court decided not to impose sanctions this time, it made it clear that future violations will likely result in penalties.

The takeaway for anyone involved in legal proceedings is simple: follow the rules about word counts and brief content. Trying to sneak in extra arguments by referencing other documents is not only improper, but it could also land you in hot water with the court.