going and your honor i've been asked by the spanish government to state that the kingdom of spain is deeply concerned about the district court's lack of attention to spain's professional secrecy laws and asked me to express its appreciation to this court for its consideration of the motion first day nominally your honor the appellant's in this case are a lawyer and law firm and a naval architect and they and in new york and we must emphasize that the work of the new york lawyers and new york experts was performed in support of spanish criminal proceedings against the apple in his employer and others and the proceedings in the southern district of new york against the american bureau of shipping the documents and testimony that are sought here are recognized under both spanish law and new york law to be the property of the client that is the kingdom of spain and the disclosures that the district court has ordered will irreparably harm the interest of the kingdom of spain and the preservation of professional secrecy under its laws are u will be that has been requested is privileged yes we are going to all of the material that has been requested is subject to spanish professional secrecy law and in that connection we have submitted letters from the government of spain to the district court requesting the discovery not be granted and presenting a detailed discussion of this issue which is an issue spanish law under the constitution the statutes the regulations and the decisional law of the courts of spain i saw a reference in the materials which i read carefully but i am confused about one aspect of this there is reference to a privilege log before the district court is there a process that the district court is contemplating about looking at material i don't buy item as after the decision here or  i mistaken about that what the district court has done is to direct us and it did this actually back in two thousand and thirteen when this case was originally before to review the paper documents and to designate those items that we consider to be privileged under u s law and the privilege log that we have submitted to the district  review is a privilege log of items that are privileged under u s law but what the next step is that the court intends to take on that after review the district court has not told us the scope of the spanish privilege however is a great deal broader the scope of span of privilege in fact covers everything that is in the lawyers possession everything lawyers come to know and that's established how on the record and that is  d that is established through the submissions made by the government of spain which are detailed submissions one with one attorneys for for spain  an affidavit submitted i think and there is some dispute i think from other parties about the scope of the spanish privilege in speaking as if it's kind of you know there in black and white for all to see but i'm not quite so sure  it's clear in terms of this submissions that have been made by us there are two kinds of submissions that we've made we've made submissions by the government of spain which has addressed the issues of spanish law in detail with citation to statutes and case law and we have submitted as well an affirmation by a professor spanish professor of spanish law that is that is to the same effect and i get on all of that is i mean my destiny is these documents were produced in connection with litigation brought by the king of spain in new york and pursued in the southern district here it's not clear to me why spanish law would govern the question of privilege well because these documents are now being sought not in connection with that litigation that was in new york but rather pursuant to seven hundred eighty two for purposes of  a lawsuit that has not yet been brought in spain that the petitioner seeks to bring in spain and so the question of whether the spanish privilege applies is really properly one under intel which switch which views applicable privilege as a threshold issue and under this court's precedent in animal science which which speaks to the deference  owed to a foreign government when it addresses issues of its own law in the u s courts the issue of privilege is one to be determined in the first instance by the spanish for a show is that it's going to be use in a foreign proceeding there are two such pro foreign proceedings on the rise and those documents were generated in connect in new york in connection with proceedings in new york once again i don't really understand why  spanish control well the thing that i think we should emphasize here is that they were generated in a variety of places in the world the documents happened to be in new york but they were generated a variety of places in the world in connection with proceedings that were ongoing in spain as as in connection with proceedings that were taking place in new york so it is it is not accurate to say that these are documents that came into existence with only a new york proceeding in mind the  witnesses all of that testified in the spanish proceeding the issues were issues that were confronted in the spanish proceeding and we are in a position today where where what is s is information on the one hand supposedly for use in a proceeding in the european court of human rights where the rules explicitly for bid any new evidence in the context of review taken by  contemplated is actually an interesting question the apple lease position is internally contradictory on the one hand he says that he has enough he said repeatedly that he has enough information to file a quite a a criminal is spanish proceeding  on the other hand he says that he needs the documents that we have in order you or to support the case that he already has or to convince himself that he doesn't need to bother filing and spe relief remedy what do you want us to do we want a stay of proceedings in the district court pending your decision o thank you thank you your honor a better response or a more accurate response to your honor's last question is what the appellant's want is actually to delay for so long as this application becomes moot the applicant requires this time ask the applicant to submit the further evidence which he deems supports his application of his human rights have been violated this that delay is the function and the sole purpose of this motion can be first of all i don't think i've ever seen a motion for an emergency stay without it an adjoining motion for an expedited hearing there is no motion for an expedited hearing by the appellate in fact if you look at their rule thirty two thirty one point two statement which was filed on november thirtieth they want to submit their briefs on the very last day they can this is not intended to affect some to correct some statement or to produce a document or other thing in violation of any legally political privilege in our case it's pretty clear that that includes foreign privileges so explain why at this early stage we should feel confident that there is not a question here privilege that should slow us down well i think as judge carney pointed out exactly these documents were obtained and prepared for use in u s litigation the spains litigation against a b s went on in this court house for eight years there was vast discovery that went on all of the documents that we seek ultimately ended up being either declarations worn or sworn under penalty of perjury of the united states or expert reports  prepared in accordance with the federal rules of some civil procedure that was what they were designed for that's the evidence of the background evidence of those pleadings are exactly what we're looking for that they some day later on became part of these witnesses some day later on three years or in two thousand and thirteen testified in spain thank yous are relevant repeat what you just said you said you're looking for declarations by witnesses and what was the other matter no it there are the witnesses that sort of thing correct correspondence with their counsel correspondence with others their work reports etc in answer to your honor's question first of all a touch base asked which would we believe would apply would compel the the application of s law if if it wasn't he'd a political number two all of the discussions about what spanish law applies have been addressed by our counsel and they have established clearly that it's their privilege is the same as ours only that which has been provided by the client is privileged and as to the privilege on following up on judge livingston's earlier question if we were to agree with you for example generally that these were being properly requested for use in a foreign proceeding with there and then you might there still be some documents that you have sought that would be subject to united states privilege and not producible would the district court then go on to make a kind of you know document by document determination or i don't know where do we stand i don't know that judge cristol anticipates necessarily a document by document but for instance the privilege log was prepared there were one hundred thirty five items and numerated on it and by the way that that refers only to a very small portion of what it is was request but they have pointed out one hundred thirty five we designated ten for the judges in camera review the judge has agreed to maintain jurisdiction to address issues of privilege that might apply under u s law he has denied this spanish secrecy law pick up like ability and follow up on your response to  assuming for the argument only that you prevail here and the stay is denied we were out of the proceeding stem where do we go from there what's the status of this case while the status of this case is that judge  continues to review documents as they're produced and they should be produced and produced forthwith the but the appeal would go forward the appeal goes forward and it is not my because this court has the ability to prove to render a remedy such as identified cases in my brief where for instance the court has said yes you were granted those documents but you must now return to them ok there is that it is not  the appeal continues on and the appeal still had you know still has merit and even you would favor an expedited appeal your honor i would be perfectly happy to have to do the respondents i'm sorry the two were in may the european court of human rights submission there is just no known date when that will be required that's entirely up to the court to determine when it is we must make our final submission and we're really talking about here just in application because those documents are actual measurements of the ship and it's sunk in condition that information just can't be taken and used it has to be taken reviewed and analyzed by experts before we even know what it says and in that case we have you know so we need those documents you know order to assimilate the information in them to be prepared to provide them to the european court of human rights when they ask for