JASON93 / LEGAL TECHSearch the reference
AuthorityCurrent through August 26, 2026View as Markdown

Legal review · Links checked : the source is available · Scope & methodology

This record is not a citator check. Confirm later history and treatment before relying on it.

authority type
case
jurisdiction
federal_nationwide
publication status
published_united_states_reports
precedential status
binding
decision or issuance date
2005-10-31
subsequent history
Later rule amendments changed filing periods and Rule 45 extension text, not the jurisdiction/forfeiture classification.
negative treatment status
Official-primary-source review found no overruling as of 2026-08-24; comprehensive commercial citator not run.
material limitations
The opinion recites superseded numerical deadlines and former Rule 45 text; cite current rules for current mechanics.

Open official source ↗

Linked modules

Eberhart v. United States

Holding

Rule 33's deadline is a nonjurisdictional claim-processing rule. A properly raised timeliness objection must be enforced, but the objection can be forfeited.

Procedural disposition

The Court reversed the Seventh Circuit because the government waited too long to assert untimeliness.

Material limitations

The case construed an older Rule 33 and Rule 45. The present filing periods and the current Rule 45 extension language must come from the current rules, not from the historical numerical deadlines recited in the opinion.

Official source and pinpoint

GovInfo official United States Reports, 546 U.S. 12, 13–19: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USREPORTS-546/pdf/USREPORTS-546-12.pdf