In re Application of Sukhbaatar Batbold for an Order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1782
Case Number: 1:2021mc00218
Filed: October 6, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
Nature of Suit: Other
Cause of Action: M 77 Application to have subpoena issued to person living in this district re: action in foreign cou

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
May 16, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 89 ORDER denying without prejudice 88 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. The parties' May 12, 2022 request to adjourn the May 19, 2022 status conference is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The May 19, 2022 status conference has been scheduled, wi th the parties' consent, since April 26, 2022. (ECF 86 at 74:25-75:13). The Court is unable to accommodate the two other times the parties have proposed, and the parties do not explain why this adjournment is necessary. Any further request1 to adjourn the May 19, 2022 status conference must include a reason why the adjournment is necessary. The Clerk of Court is directed to close ECF 88.. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang on 5/16/2022) (rro)
April 8, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 82 ORDER: By April 14, 2022, the parties are each directed to file a letter detailing whether: The discovery currently sought is "for use in" any of the remaining global litigations. See Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U. S. 241, 264 (2004); Batbold seeks different or narrower discovery from K2 in light of the dismissals; The extent to which K2's privilege argument in its request to file a Motion to Quash (ECF 59) is impacted by the revelation that K&S is no t and was never authorized to represent OPG in litigation against Batbold; and Batbold's anticipated future litigations satisfy the enumerated Intel factors in this § 1782 Petition. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang on 4/8/2022) (rro)
January 10, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 73 ORDER: Accordingly, by no later than January 14, 2022, K2 shall submit a letter informing the Court as to whether it prefers (1) this Court to consider its objections without regard to the developments and arguments discussed in the letters of December 6, 2021 and January 5, 2022; or (2) to withdraw its pending objections and raise these developments before Judge Wang for her consideration in the first instance. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 1/10/2022) (ate)
October 20, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 55 ORDER: granting 54 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. Application granted. K2 may file objections to Judge Wang's order no later than November 3, 2021. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 10/20/2021) (ama)
October 6, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 53 ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO CONDUCT DISCOVERY FOR USE IN FOREIGN PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1782 granting 12 Letter Motion for Discovery. For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner's discovery application pursuant to 28 U.S.C. &# 167; 1782 is GRANTED. Petitioner is hereby authorized to serve its proposed subpoenas by October 20, 2021, if it has not served them already. If K2 seeks to file a motion to quash or a motion for a protective order, it must do so by November 3, 2021 and must follow this Court's Individual Practices in doing so. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to close ECF 12. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang on 10/6/2021) (rro)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: In re Application of Sukhbaatar Batbold for an Order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1782
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?