In re Grand Jury Investigation of Possible Violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1956 and 50 U.S.C. § 1705
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtBeryl A. Howell, Chief Judge
In December 2017, the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia served two Chinese banks-Bank One and Bank Two-with a grand jury subpoena, and a third Chinese bank-Bank Three-with an administrative subpoena.1 All three *45subpoenas are for records of transactions for [REDACTED], a now-defunct Hong Kong based front company for North Korea's state-run [REDACTED]. Each bank refused to comply. Almost a year later, on November 29, 2018, the government moved to compel each bank's compliance with their respective subpoena. See Gov't's Mot. Compel. Produc. Docs. Req. Via Bank of Nova Scotia…
2Cases cited53 opinions
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Daimler AG v. BaumanSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S. A. v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., San Francisco Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 2017
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- In re SealedCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2019
- Estate of Ismael Galvan Solorio v. Islamic Republic of IranDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2026
- In re Cote d'Azur Estate CorporationCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2022
- In re Cote d'Azur Estate CorporationCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2022
- Jgc Holdings Corporation v. Kingdom of SpainDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2024
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.