Republic of Ecuador v. for the Issuance of a Subpoena Under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(A)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “facts or data” is construed broadly to require disclosure of any material considered by testifying expert, even if materials are protected by work-product privilege
• holding that once the district court “affirmatively decided the proper scope of discovery” the order was final even if “subject to ongoing dispute about its coverage and scope before a magistrate judge”
• holding, in a section 1782 proceeding, that \there is nothing to be done 'on the merits' \ because \[t]he only issue before the district court is discovery\
• noting the “core understanding that the work-product doctrine solely pro- tects the inner workings of an attorney’s mind”
• discussing work product protection for expert witness materials under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, including 2010 amendments to rule
• “[Section] 1782 orders are considered final and appealable to this court.” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).