Effective December 24, 2025, United States Postal Service (USPS) postmarks no longer reflect the date mail is deposited in a local mailbox. Instead, postmarks now reflect the date mail is processed at a regional USPS facility. This operational shift has meaningful implications for time sensitive legal submissions, particularly in the context of class action settlement administration, where postmark-based deadlines are customary.
Key Implications for Settlement Administration
Deadline Risk and Enforceability
The new postmarking policy introduces heightened uncertainty about timeliness of claims, opt-outs and objections, all of which are typically governed by firm court-approved deadlines. Even if submissions are mailed in good faith before a deadline, processing delays may cause them to receive postmarks dated after the deadline, making timely submissions appear late.
The uncertainty is particularly salient for opt-outs. A delayed postmark may effectively undermine a class member’s effort to exclude themselves despite otherwise timely mailing, raising potential due process concerns and increasing the likelihood of appellate challenges. Objections face similar uncertainty.
Beyond individual outcomes, these dynamics increase administrative challenges, create the possibility of inconsistent determinations, and may lead to litigation risk for settling parties.
Proof of Timely Mailing
Reliance on automated USPS postmarks alone may no longer provide reliable proof of timeliness. Settlement administrators and counsel should anticipate challenges and consider encouraging alternative forms of mailing evidence with variable levels of burden, including:
- Hand-stamped postmarks obtained at USPS retail counters
- Certified or registered mail with dated receipts
- Certificates of mailing confirming the date USPS accepted the item
Each provides contemporaneous documentation that the sender acted before the deadline, even if downstream processing occurs later.
Best Practices and Recommendations
Strengthen Notice Communications
Settlement notices and submission instructions should be revised to:
- Drive class members to the settlement website to submit claims or communications
- Alert class members that USPS postmarks may reflect processing dates rather than mailing dates
- Encourage early mailing of all time-sensitive submissions
- Promote certified, hand-stamped or otherwise verifiable mailing methods
Clear guidance protects class members’ rights, reduces confusion and minimizes administrative challenges.
Educate Courts on Postmark Timing Changes
Many courts may continue to assume that a postmark reflects the mailing date. Without carefully tailored explanation, courts may be ill-equipped to address related issues that could arise.
Practitioners can mitigate this risk by:
- Including a brief explanatory footnote or declaration in settlement submissions
- Proposing deadline language that accounts for processing date postmarks or permits alternative proof of timely mailing
Proactive education helps prevent inconsistent rulings and post-approval challenges.
Coordinate Closely with Settlement Administrators
Counsel should work proactively with settlement administrators to align on deadline definitions, acceptance and rejection criteria and protocols for resolving postmark-related disputes.
Early coordination supports consistent treatment of submissions and helps ensure that administrative decisions remain defensible if challenged in court.
Contact Kroll’s Settlement Administration Team today for a consultation.
