United States v. International Business Machines Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
EDELSTEIN, Chief Judge:
Pursuant to Pretrial Order No. 12 the parties in the above captioned action served subpoenas duces tecum and ad testificandum on ten1 competitors or former competitors of International Business Machines Corporation (IBM). Seven of the ten subpoenaed parties moved before this court for various forms of relief. In the main, three types of relief were requested: (1) advancement of costs for complying with the duces tecum directive of the IBM subpoena, Fed.R.Civ.P. 45(b)(2); (2) quashing or modifying certain portions of the IBM document demand, Fed.R. Civ.P.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- In re Radio Corp. of AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1952
- Blank v. Talley Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1972
- United States v. International Business Machines Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1974
3Cited by16 opinions
- Concord Boat Corp. v. Brunswick Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- United States v. International Business Machines Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1979
- In re the Exxon ValdezDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1992
- Cantaline v. Raymark Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. Florida · 1984
- Pollitt v. Mobay Chemical Corp.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1982
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.