U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
District Court, District of Columbia
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Denying McGraw-Hill’s Motion for Leave to File a Sur-Reply; Granting in Part the Application for an Order Requiring Compliance with Administrative Subpoena; Granting in Part McGraw-Hill’s Cross-Motion for a Protective Order
RICARDO M. URBINA, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Submitted for the court’s resolution is the application of the United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“the Commission”) for an order requiring the respondent, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (“McGraw-Hill”), to comply with an administrative subpoena, against which the latter has filed an…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- United States v. LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Branzburg v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States v. Morton Salt Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- United States v. BryanSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Zerilli v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1981
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. WilsonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2014
- U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Amaranth Advisors, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2008
- U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Kraft Foods Group, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2016
- In Re Subpoena to GoldbergDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- Estate of Esther Klieman v. Palestinian AuthorityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.