Securities & Exchange Commission v. Rajaratnam

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Court lacks jurisdiction to review interlocutory “discovery orders allegedly adverse to a claim of privilege or privacy”
• holding the district court’s order to turn over wiretapped conversations to the SEC was not immediately appealable under Mohawk, but granting the alternative petition for writ of mandamus
• applying Mohawk to the privacy right derived from Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968
• stating the “the role of civil discovery [is to] ensuref] informational equality between the parties” and that an “informational imbalance” gives the non-producing party an unfair advantage in a civil proceeding
• “Even 11 though we lack interlocutory jurisdiction to review the district court’s order, a 12 writ of mandamus may still be appropriate.”
• district courts have “considerable discretion” to Case: 14-103 Document: 17 Page: 3 Filed: 12/11/2013 IN RE VUTEC CORPORATION 3 control their dockets, including the scheduling of motions practice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).