There is no national limit, and that is the problem
Every federal court runs its own installation of CM/ECF, and each one sets its own maximum PDF size. Ask PACER directly whether there is a limit and the answer is that it depends on the court, followed by a pointer to the Court CM/ECF Lookup tool.
So the official guidance is: go and check, one court at a time. That is a reasonable position for PACER to take and a miserable one to be on the receiving end of at half past four on a filing deadline.
Here is what twenty-one courts actually say, read from their own websites — plus two that decline to say.
The limits
| Court | Limit per document | What the court says |
|---|---|---|
| District of Massachusetts | 7 MB | Each PDF document may not exceed 7 MB in size |
| S.D. New York | 10 MB | No single PDF file may be larger than 10.0 megabytes |
| E.D. Virginia | 10 MB | Documents larger than 10.0 megabytes are automatically rejected |
| N.D. Iowa | 15 MB | Each document must be 15 mbs or less |
| District of Colorado | 25 MB | File size limit of 25 MB |
| District of Arizona | 30 MB | The size limit is 30 MB (thirty megabytes, or 30000 KB) per document |
| N.D. Georgia | 30 MB | All PDF files must be 30 MB or less |
| District of Maryland | 30 MB | The system's per document capacity is 30 megabytes |
| C.D. California | 35 MB | Individual PDF files shall not exceed 35 MB in size |
| N.D. Illinois | 35 MB | Raised from 20 MB to 35 MB in 2016 |
| E.D. Wisconsin | 35 MB | Raised from 10 MB to 35 MB in April 2017 |
| District of Delaware | 35 MB | PDF documents filed electronically shall not exceed 35 megabytes in size |
| E.D. New York | 40 MB | Error reads: You cannot load this file, it is over 40 MB |
| N.D. California | 50 MB | ECF will reject anything 50.0MB (50,000KB), or over |
| S.D. Florida | 50 MB | Error reads: You cannot load this file because it is over 50 Megabytes (MB) |
| E.D. Texas | 50 MB | ECF will not accept files of a different type or larger than 50 MB in size |
| E.D. Pennsylvania | 50 MB | The size limit for a PDF filed on CM/ECF is 50.0 MB per file |
| E.D. Michigan | 50 MB | An exhibit larger than 50 megabytes must be divided into separate files |
| M.D. Florida | 50 MB | CM/ECF has a 50-megabyte limitation per document |
| District of Oregon | 75 MB | PDF files that exceed 75 MB will not be accepted by CM/ECF |
| W.D. Washington | 100 MB | Raised from 75 MB to 100 MB, effective March 2026 |
| District of New Jersey | not published | Refers filers to a live court information page rather than stating a figure |
| S.D. Texas | not published | Its FAQ says a procedural order limits document size, without giving the number |
Every figure above was read from that court own website on 4 September 2026, and every source is linked at the foot of this page. Limits change: confirm against the court own site before you rely on one.
What the spread actually means
The range is 7 MB to 100 MB, a factor of fourteen, across ten distinct values. The same 40 MB exhibit bundle is unremarkable in Seattle, borderline in Los Angeles, and impossible in Boston without being divided.
And the limit has nothing to do with how busy the court is. The Southern District of New York handles some of the largest commercial litigation in the world and caps a single PDF at 10 MB, one of the lowest figures here. If you practise in more than one district, the number you have memorised is probably the wrong one somewhere.
Two courts will not tell you
The District of New Jersey and the Southern District of Texas both decline to publish a number. New Jersey points filers at a live court-information page instead. Southern Texas acknowledges in its own FAQ that a procedural order limits document size, and then does not say what the limit is.
This is worth knowing before you spend twenty minutes searching for something that is not there. In both cases the answer is to check inside the filing system itself, or call the clerk.
The exact error, and a trap most guidance misses
Two courts publish their rejection message word for word, which is useful because that is what people paste into a search box at eleven at night:
"You cannot load this file because it is over 50 Megabytes (MB)." (S.D. Florida)
"You cannot load this file, it is over 40 MB." (E.D. New York)
And the trap: some courts cap the whole filing as well as each document. The Eastern District of Virginia limits each document to 10 MB and the total filing, attachments included, to 30 MB. Splitting an oversized document into four compliant parts can still put you over a ceiling you did not know existed. If your court states a per-filing figure, that is the one that governs how many volumes you can actually send.
Compress first. Split only if you have to
A single document is easier for a clerk and a judge to work with than four volumes, so reducing the file is the better outcome where it is available.
The catch specific to court work is that a filing has to stay legible, and compressing a scan hard enough to hit an aggressive target is exactly how text stops being legible. Scanned exhibits are the usual offender: a page photographed in colour can be many times the size of the same page scanned properly in black and white, at no benefit to anyone reading it.
If the document is still over the limit at a resolution you would be comfortable defending, then split it - and split it by size rather than by page count, because page count tells you nothing about bytes. A single photographic exhibit page can outweigh fifty pages of brief.
Practical notes
- Label the volumes. Most courts expect something like Volume 1 of 4 in the docket text, and many want a caption page on each part.
- Ask the clerk if you are unsure. It is a two-minute call and much cheaper than a rejected filing.
- The limit is usually per document, not per filing. Several courts state explicitly that the cap applies to each individual component, so a motion with three exhibits is four separate files each measured on its own. Check the wording for your court, because this is not universal.
- This page is not legal advice, and it is not authoritative. It is a set of figures read from public court websites on a stated date, with every source linked so you can check them yourself in seconds.