()

District Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis

 

Read Full-Text Decision

In July 2013 petitioner sought discovery of all notes, records and documents from the U.S. Attorney’s Office concerning a plea agreement proposal offered him in the government’s case against him. Despite producing responsive non-privileged documents, the government claimed that certain responsive documents (Internal Documents) were protected under the work-product and other privileges. The court denied petitioner reconsideration of its Dec. 12, 2016 ruling that the government was not required to produce the Internal Documents and that no further discovery was warranted with respect to the July 9, 2013 discovery request. Petitioner failed to show substantial need justifying disclosure of the Internal Documents. He did not identify any matters not considered by the court that might reasonably be expected to alter the court’s determination. Nor did the government waive its work-product privilege. Petitioner presented no evidence it selectively disclosed the contents of the Internal Documents or relied on the Internal Documents to advance its own arguments in the instant proceeding. Thus it could not be said the government is using the Internal Documents to support its position and yet refuses to grant petitioner access to them.