About This Project
1328f.org is an independent research project that uses publicly available court data to measure consumer bankruptcy outcomes at scale. We build open-source tools, publish empirical research, and track enforcement developments in consumer bankruptcy.
The project began with a simple question: when Congress created a statutory bar on repeat-filer discharges in Section 1328(f) of the Bankruptcy Code, did the system actually enforce it?
To answer that question, we built a screening tool that analyzed 4.9 million bankruptcy filings across all 94 federal bankruptcy districts. We found 391,951 prior filers who received Chapter 13 discharges with zero eligibility verification. In a verified 7-district sample, 264 were confirmed violations where debtors filed within the statutory bar window. The screening methodology, the data, and the tools are all open-source.
What We Publish
Reports
Empirical research on consumer bankruptcy outcomes, attorney performance, and systemic enforcement gaps. Every report is based on public court data and uses reproducible methodology.
Docket Watch
Tracking significant developments in consumer bankruptcy accountability: enforcement actions, rule changes, judicial findings, and institutional responses to data-driven oversight.
Methodology
Technical documentation of our data sources, analytical methods, and quality controls. Designed so that any practitioner, researcher, or institution can replicate our work in their own jurisdiction.
Tools
Open-source tools for screening, analysis, and visualization. The Section 1328(f) Discharge Screener is our flagship tool, available at no cost with no data collection. See also the plain-English explainer, the eligibility checker, and the key case law page.
Principles
- Public data only. Every dataset we use is derived from publicly available court records: the FJC Integrated Database, PACER Case Locator, and CourtListener RECAP archive.
- Open source. All tools and analysis code are published on GitHub under open licenses.
- Reproducible. Every finding includes methodology documentation sufficient for independent verification.
- No legal advice. We publish data and analysis. We do not provide legal advice or represent clients.
- Privacy first. We do not publish individual debtor names. Aggregate statistics and anonymized examples only.
Institutional Recognition
- U.S. Courts Rules Committee — Empirical data submitted to the Administrative Office in support of Rules Suggestion 25-BK-N (Judges Rebecca B. Connelly and Benjamin Kahn, proposed amendment to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4004). The amendment would require courts to verify discharge eligibility under Sections 727(a)(8), 727(a)(9), and 1328(f) as a ministerial duty, rather than relying on parties to file objections. Currently before the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules. Our data — 4.9 million cases, 94 districts, 391,951 zero-verification discharges — provides the empirical basis showing why the amendment is needed. See also In re Filice, 580 B.R. 259 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2018) (attached to the suggestion). March 2026.
- Google Search — The 1328f.com screener ranks on page 1 for "1328(f)" queries, above multiple government reference sites.
Related Research & Commentary
Independent work by scholars and judges that intersects with the questions this project addresses.
Court Access & Data Transparency
- A Free PACER Will Improve Judicial Transparency — Prof. Jonah Gelbach (Berkeley Law). Podcast on how aggregating federal court data reveals systemic patterns invisible in individual cases, and why the PACER paywall blocks the public from its own court records. Berkeley Law Voices Carry.
- Jonah Gelbach on PACER — International Center for Law & Economics. Extended discussion of the economics and policy of court data access.
Consumer Bankruptcy Outcomes
- Why Individuals File for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy — Prof. Rich Hynes (UVA Law). Analysis of individual Ch. 11 filing patterns and outcomes. Hynes has testified before Congress multiple times on consumer bankruptcy. UVA Law podcast.
- Racial Disparities and Bias in Consumer Bankruptcy — Argyle, Indarte, Iverson & Palmer (NBER Working Paper, 2025). Documents that minority filers are 12.7 percentage points more likely to have Ch. 13 cases dismissed without debt relief. The same high-dismissal patterns our tools detect at the attorney level may compound these disparities.
- Moral Hazard versus Liquidity in Household Bankruptcy — Prof. Sasha Indarte (Wharton). Finds 83% of the filing response to dischargeable debt comes from liquidity effects rather than moral hazard — relevant to understanding why repeat filers return to bankruptcy. Journal of Finance, 2023.
The Rule 4004 Problem
- Rules Suggestion 25-BK-N — Judges Rebecca B. Connelly (W.D. Va.) and Benjamin Kahn (M.D.N.C.). Proposes amending Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4004 so courts verify discharge eligibility as a ministerial duty. Includes the full text of In re Filice, 580 B.R. 259 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2018), where Judge Christopher Klein vacated an erroneously entered discharge six years after the fact. Currently before the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules.
Contact
For research inquiries, data requests, media, or collaboration:
1328f.org is an independent research project. Not affiliated with any law firm, government agency, or academic institution.