Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00772/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00772-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

cal 

1 07cv0772

 

 

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION

TO ENFORCE ADMINISTRATIVE

SUBPOENAS OF

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL NICITA and EDWARD

LEONARD,

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No.07CV0772 WQH (AJB)

Order Following Telephonic Hearing

 A telephonic hearing was held on July 10, 2007 at 9:00 a.m. before Judge Battaglia to discuss

resolution of Respondents’ claims of privilege set forth in the privilege log produced to the Petitioner on

June 22, 2007. The parties informed the Court that a number of entries on Respondents privilege log

Case 3:07-cv-00772-WQH-AJB Document 13 Filed 07/11/07 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

 Petitioner stated during the hearing that the majority of entries in the privilege log correspond

to documents that postdate the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) search warrant, which was

executed on July 23, 2003, and are therefore not necessary or relevant to Petitioner’s case. While not

waiving their objections to Respondents’ claims of privilege to these documents, Petitioner stated that

the parties may be able to reach agreement with regard these documents, thereby significantly reducing

the number of documents at issue between the parties.

 Additionally, Petitioner agreed to provide Respondents with an electronic copy of all

documents in the Advanced Marketing Services, Inc. (“AMS”) database.

K:\COMMON\BATTAGLI\CASES\SEC\07cv772.SEC.v.Necita.Order.fol.hearing.7.10.wpd 2 07cv0772

remain at issue between the parties.1 As such, the Court sets the following briefing schedule for the

parties:

Petitioner shall file a brief on or before July 30, 2007, which shall: 1) set forth Petitioner’s

arguments regarding the applicability of the Joint Defense Agreement (“JDA”); 2) set forth Petitioner’s

arguments regarding Respondents allegations that the SEC’s possession and use of privileged documents has irreparably tainted the SEC’s investigation; 3) provide declarations from all relevant SEC

personnel detailing what documents from the database of documents produced by Advanced Marketing

Services, Inc. (“AMS”) have been used to date in the SEC’s investigation to date; and 4) submit for in

camera review, a copy of all documents used to date in the SEC’s investigation to which Respondents’

have made a claim of privilege.

Respondents shall file a reply brief on or before August 13, 2007, which shall: 1) respond to

Petitioner’s arguments regarding the applicability of the Joint Defense Agreement (“JDA”); and 2)

respond to Petitioner’s arguments regarding Respondents allegations that the SEC’s possession and use

of privileged documents has irreparably tainted the SEC’s investigation.

 Additionally, Respondents shall on or before July 30, 2007, submit for in camera review the

copy of the JDA which Respondents contend was agreed to and in effect during the relevant period.

A hearing on this matter is hereby set for August 17, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. before Judge Battaglia in

Courtroom A. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 11, 2007

Hon. Anthony J. Battaglia

U.S. Magistrate Judge

United States District Court

Case 3:07-cv-00772-WQH-AJB Document 13 Filed 07/11/07 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

K:\COMMON\BATTAGLI\CASES\SEC\07cv772.SEC.v.Necita.Order.fol.hearing.7.10.wpd 3 07cv0772

Case 3:07-cv-00772-WQH-AJB Document 13 Filed 07/11/07 Page 3 of 3