Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-03073/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-03073-17/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNIVERSAL TRADING & INVESTMENT

CO., 

Plaintiff,

 v.

PETRO MIKOLAYEVICH 

KIRITCHENKO, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C-99-3073 MMC (EDL)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO COMPEL

Plaintiff Universal Trading & Investment Co. moved to compel Defendant Petro

Mikolayevich Kiritchenko to produce a number of categories of documents. At the hearing, the

parties executed a stipulation by which Kiritchenko agreed to produce documents that he argued

were protected by his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. See Docket No. 982. That

part of Plaintiff’s motion to compel accordingly is DENIED AS MOOT. Plaintiff’s motion to

compel Defendant to produce documents from Ukrainian courts is DENIED, except that Defendant

shall produce docket sheets reflecting docket entries entered after its last production of docket

sheets, through the date of this Order. Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendant to produce

correspondence between himself and/or his agents and the General Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine is

DENIED. Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendant to produce a privilege log is GRANTED as to

documents created before the commencement of this action (or related matters), and DENIED as to

Case 3:99-cv-03073-MMC Document 983 Filed 03/22/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

documents created afterwards. Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 21, 2006 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:99-cv-03073-MMC Document 983 Filed 03/22/06 Page 2 of 2