IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

In re Deutsche Bank Spoofing Litigation

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 20-cv-3638

Judge Joan B. Gottschall

ORDER

In their status report filed November 14, 2022, ECF No. 71 (“status report”), the parties 

report that they are at issue over certain discovery requests. Specifically, they disagree about the 

scope of jurisdictional discovery authorized by the order dated July 20, 2022, ECF No. 61.

Defendants take the position “that the trading data for only two traders is required, since these 

are the only two traders identified in the CFTC [Commodities Futures Trading Commission] 

Order and which form the basis for Plaintiffs’ claims.” Status Report ¶ 13. Plaintiffs’ position is:

that while Defendants’ production flagged at least 34 traders with spoofing alerts in 

CBOT [Chicago Board of Trade] Treasury and CME [Chicago Mercantile 

Exchange] Eurodollar futures during 2013, Defendants produced transaction data 

for only two traders. Plaintiffs assert that consistent with the Court-ordered 

jurisdictional discovery and Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Class Action Complaint (ECF 

No. 40 at ¶ 79) (alleging broader spoofing and market manipulation by Defendants 

beyond the two traders mentioned in the CFTC Order), Plaintiffs’ subpoena to the 

CME will supplement Defendants’ September 19 production and provide “the full 

record of Defendants’ orders, trades and cancelations in CBOT Treasury and CME 

Eurodollar futures during 2013” (ECF No. 61 at 6). 

Status Report ¶ 11.

The parties have not filed the discovery requests, responses, and subpoena at issue. 

Although helpful, the summaries in the status report filed November 14, 2022, provide very 

limited information. In the order dated July 20, 2022, the court “authorize[d] plaintiffs to 

conduct limited discovery consistent with the proposal in their supplemental memorandum.” 

Order at 7 (citing Pls.’ Suppl. Br. 12–13, ECF No. 50). Page six of the order quotes the cited 

portion of plaintiff’s memorandum defining the scope of jurisdictional discovery plaintiffs 

proposed and the court authorized:

Here, pre-existing, non-privileged documents furnished to or by the CFTC (and 

those in any related CME and/or CBOT investigations) would be sought in 

Case: 1:20-cv-03638 Document #: 73 Filed: 11/17/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:594
2

discovery. To the extent defendants’ order and trade history is not in those files, the 

full record of Defendants’ orders, trades and cancelations in CBOT Treasury and 

Eurodollar futures during 2013 also would be sought.

Id. at 6 (alterations omitted) (quoting Pls.’ Suppl. Br. 12–13).

By its plain terms, the second sentence permits discovery beyond the scope of the 

investigations described in the first sentence. Thus, based on the limited information the parties 

have provided, plaintiffs appear to be correctly reading the order dated July 20, 2022, insofar as 

they contend that court-authorized discovery is broader than the investigations referenced in the 

first sentence quoted above.

In the status report, plaintiffs ask the court to require defendants to provide “the 

identifying information requested by Plaintiffs’ Interrogatories within 14 days.” Status Report 

¶ 12. The court has tentatively ruled on the scope of discovery based on a very limited record, 

but the court declines to enter an order compelling defendants to produce specific discovery 

material without seeing the discovery requests at issue and receiving full briefing on an 

appropriate discovery motion, such as a motion to compel or a motion for a protective order.

Before filing any discovery motion, the parties must meet and confer in accordance with Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(1) and Local Rule 37.2. If the parties cannot reach an agreement, 

any discovery motions will be briefed as follows: motions due: November 22, 2022; response 

due: December 1, 2022. No replies are authorized. If the parties reach an agreement obviating 

the need for motion practice, they must so inform the court by and including November 22, 

2022.

Dated: November 17, 2022 /s/

Joan B. Gottschall

United States District Judge 

Case: 1:20-cv-03638 Document #: 73 Filed: 11/17/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:595