In Re Grand Jury Subpoena, Dated April 18, 2003, John Doe v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
CANBY, Circuit Judge.
Appellant John Doe was held in contempt by the district court and he appeals, challenging the district court’s denial of his motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum. The government served Doe with the subpoena in conjunction with an antitrust investigation into price fixing in the Dynamic Random Access Memory chip market. We conclude that, because of the breadth of the subpoena and the government’s limited knowledge of the documents sought, Doe’s production of the documents would have a testimonial aspect protected by the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Kastigar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Wilson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- United States v. HubbellSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- United States v. BrightCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- In Re: Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated March 25, 2011, USA v. John DoeCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2012
- United States v. GreenfieldCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2016
- United States v. Ponds, NavronCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2006
- MUELLER INDUSTRIES, INC. v. BerkmanAppellate Court of Illinois · 2010
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.