Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-mc-80069/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-mc-80069-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Malsaeng Co., Ltd. v. Young-Sung Kim
In Re
United States of America
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

1

 Record citations are to documents in the Electronic Case File (“ECF”); pinpoint citations

are to the ECF-generated page numbers at the top of the documents.

C 15-80069 LB

ORDER

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Northern District of California

San Francisco Division

IN RE: REQUEST FOR INTERNATIONAL

JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE

NATIONAL COURT ADMINISTRATION

OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA, IN THE

MATTER OF MALSAENG CO., LTD. v.

YOUNG-SUNG KIM,

_____________________________________/

No. C15-80069 MISC LB

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S

APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO

CONDUCT DISCOVERY FOR USE IN

A FOREIGN LEGAL PROCEEDING

PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1782

[Re: ECF No. 1]

INTRODUCTION

Petitioner United States of America filed an ex parte application to take discovery pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1782. (Application, ECF No. 1.1) That statute allows a district court to order a person

residing or found within its district to produce documents or provide testimony for use in a foreign

legal proceeding, unless the disclosure would violate a legal privilege. (See 28 U.S.C. § 1782.) The

United States has consented to the undersigned’s jurisdiction. (Consent, ECF No. 2.) Upon

consideration of the United States’s application and the relevant legal authority, the court grants the

application. 

STATEMENT

The National Court Administration of the Republic of Korea requests that the United States

Case 3:15-mc-80069-LB Document 3 Filed 03/11/15 Page 1 of 4
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

 The United States’s memorandum states that the information and documents are sought by

“the Taiwan court,” but the court presumes, in light of every other statement in the application,

memorandum, accompanying declaration, and proposed order that the United States means “the

Korean court.” 

C 15-80069 LB

ORDER

2

Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California obtain information and documents from

Google, Inc.. a company located in Mountain View, California, which is located in this District. 

(Memo, ECF No. 1-1 at 1.) The information and documents are sought by the Korean2

 court for use

in a lawsuit brought by Malsaeng Co., Ltd. against Young-Sung Kim, for recovery of damages. (Id.;

see also Declaration of Melanie Proctor, Ex. A, ECF No. 1-2.) Specifically, the Korean court seeks,

from February 7, 2013 to the present date, (1) a “list of all the applications sold under the name of

seller Defendant Yuong-Sung Kim who registered as a seller with the email address of

kandroidmobile@gmail.com and ID of KevinKim,” (2) the “total number of such applications sold,”

(3) the “retail prices of each of such applications,” and (4) “the total net amount actually paid to the

Defendant after deduction of any fees or expenses.” (Declaration of Melanie Proctor, Ex. A, ECF

No. 1-2 at 11.)

By letters dated January 21, 2015 and February 24, 2015, the United States Attorney’s Office

requested that Google, Inc. voluntarily provide the requested information. (Declaration of Melanie

Proctor, ¶ 3, ECF No. 1-2 at 1.) On February 27, 2015, Google, Inc. informed the United States

Attorney’s Office that it will not voluntarily provide the requested information, but it may respond

to a subpoena. (Id., ¶ 4, ECF No. 1-2 at 2.)

On March 2, 2015, the United States filed the pending application. (Application, ECF No. 1.) It

asks the court to grant the application and appoint Assistant United States Attorney Melanie Proctor

as Commissioner and authorize her to obtain the requested information from Google, Inc.

ANALYSIS

I. LEGAL STANDARD

28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) provides, in pertinent part:

The district court of the district in which a person resides or is found may order him

to give his testimony or statement or to produce a document or other thing for use in a

proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal, including criminal investigations

conducted before formal accusation. The order may be made pursuant to a letter

Case 3:15-mc-80069-LB Document 3 Filed 03/11/15 Page 2 of 4
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

C 15-80069 LB

ORDER

3

rogatory issued, or request made, by a foreign or international tribunal or upon the

application of any interested person and may direct that the testimony or statement be

given, or the document or other thing be produced, before a person appointed by the

court.

A litigant in a foreign action qualifies as an “interested person” under § 1782. See Intel Corp. v.

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241, 256 ( 2004). In order to apply for discovery pursuant

to § 1782, a formal proceeding in the foreign jurisdiction need not be currently pending, or even

imminent. Id. at 258- 59. Instead, all that is necessary is that a “dispositive ruling” by the foreign

adjudicative body is “within reasonable contemplation.” Id. at 259 (holding that discovery was

proper under § 1782 even though the applicant’s complaint against the opposing party was only in

the investigative stage). An ex parte application is an acceptable method for seeking discovery

pursuant to § 1782. See In re Letters Rogatory from Tokyo Dist., Tokyo, Japan, 539 F.2d 1216,

1219 (9th Cir. 1976) (holding that the subpoenaed parties may raise objections and exercise their

due process rights by bringing motions to quash the subpoenas).

A district court has wide discretion to grant discovery under § 1782. Intel, 542 U.S. at 260- 61. 

In exercising its discretion, a district court should consider the following factors: (1) whether the

“person from whom discovery is sought is a participant in the foreign proceeding”; (2) “the nature of

the foreign tribunal, the character of the proceedings underway abroad, and the receptivity of the

foreign government or the court or agency abroad to U.S. federal court judicial assistance”; (3)

whether the request “conceals an attempt to circumvent foreign proof-gathering restrictions or other

policies of a foreign country or the United States”; and (4) whether the request is “unduly intrusive

or burdensome.” See id. at 264- 65.

A district court’s discretion is to be exercised in view of the twin aims of § 1782: providing

efficient assistance to participants in international litigation, and encouraging foreign countries by

example to provide similar assistance to our courts. See Schmitz v. Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz,

LLP, 376 F.3d 79, 84 (2004). There is no requirement that the party seeking discovery establish that

the information sought would be discoverable under the governing law in the foreign proceeding or

that United States law would allow discovery in an analogous domestic proceeding. See Intel, 542

U.S. at 247, 261-63.

Case 3:15-mc-80069-LB Document 3 Filed 03/11/15 Page 3 of 4
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

C 15-80069 LB

ORDER

4

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

II. APPLICATION

A. Statutory Requirements

The United States’s application satisfies the minimum requirements of § 1782: Google, Inc.

resides in Mountain View, California, which is in this District; the requested discovery is for use in a

Korean lawsuit brought by Malsaeng Co., Ltd. against Young-Sung Kim, for recovery of damages,

which is a proceeding before a foreign tribunal; the request was made by the National Court

Administration of the Republic of Korea, a foreign tribunal; and the instant ex parte application is an

acceptable method of requesting discovery under § 1782, see In re Letters Rogatory, 539 F.2d at

1219.

B. Exercise of the Court’s Discretion

The court finds good cause to exercise its discretion to authorize the requested discovery. 

Although Google, Inc. is not a litigant in the Korean lawsuit, the Korean court requested the

information, so it is clear that it is receptive to this court’s assistance and that the request is not an

attempt to circumvent foreign proof-gathering restrictions or other policies of a foreign country or

the United States. It also does not appear that the request is unduly intrusive or burdensome. 

Should Google Inc. disagree upon being served with the subpoena, it may file a motion to quash and

raise the issue at that time. 

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, the court grants the United States’s application and appoints Assistant

United States Attorney Melanie Proctor as Commissioner and authorizes her to obtain the requested

information from Google, Inc. The Clerk of the Court shall close this action for administrative

purposes. Should Google, Inc. file a motion to quash, the action shall automatically be reopened.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 11, 2015 _______________________________

LAUREL BEELER

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:15-mc-80069-LB Document 3 Filed 03/11/15 Page 4 of 4