Document: 402 U.S. 530 91 S.Ct. 1580 29 L.Ed.2d 85 UNITED STATES, Petitioner,v.Raymond J. RYAN. No. 758. Argued April 26, 1971. Decided May 24, Syllabus District Court's order denying respondent's motion to quash a grand jury subpoena duces tecum requiring the production of records under his control in Kenya was not final and therefore appealable, Cobbledick v. United States, 309 323, 60 540, 84 L.Ed. 783; nor it rendered an appealable temporary injunction by inclusion provision respondent seek permission from Kenyan authorities remove some documents if such denied grant States agents access that country. Pp. 532 534. 9 Cir., 430 F.2d 658, reversed. Jerome Feit, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Herbert Miller, Jr., respondent. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered opinion Court. 1 In March 1968, served with commanding him produce before federal all books, records, five named companies doing business Kenya. He moved, on several grounds, subpoena. The Court and, light claim law forbids removal books account, minute lists members country without consent its Registrar Companies, ordered attempt secure unsuccessful, make available inspection Kenya.1 Appeals, 658 (CA9 1970), held directing application official release had done 'more than deny quash; effect granted mandatory injunction.' Id., at 659. Appeals concluded 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1)2 reaching merits, Ibid. We certiorari, 400 1008, 564, 27 620 (1971). conclude reverse. 2 Respondent asserts no challenge continued validity our holding 783 (1940), one whom is directed may appeal denial but must either obey commands or refuse do so contest he subsequently cited contempt account failure obey. Respondent, however, argues does apply circumstances us because, asserts, unless immediate review him, will be forced undertake substantial burden complying subpoena, 'powerless avert mischief order.' Perlman 247 7, 13, 38 417, 419, 62 950 (1918). 3 think assertion misapprehends thrust cases. Of course, complies thereafter able undo effort has exerted comply.3 But compliance only course open If, as claims, unduly burdensome otherwise unlawful, comply litigate those questions event similar proceedings are brought against him. Should contentions rejected time trial court, they then ripe appellate review.4 we have consistently necessity expedition administration criminal justifies putting who seeks resist desired information choice between court's prior any order, resistance concomitant possibility adjudication claims appeal. supra; Alexander 201 117, 26 356, 50 686 (1906); cf. Blue, 384 251, 86 1416, 16 510 (1966); Di Bella 369 121, 82 654, 7 614 (1962); Carroll 354 394, 77 1332, 1442 (1957). Only limited class cases where would render impossible whatsoever individual's allowed exceptions this principle. thus indicated immediately return seized property, there prosecution pending movant. See supra, 131—132, 654. Denial mean Government might indefinitely retain property opportunity movant assert right possession. Similarly, U.S., 12—13, S.Ct., 419 420, third party exhibits which were appellant claimed, immune production. To left order,' id., custodian could hardly been expected risk citation judicial review. present case, free noted, obtain full undertaking Perlman, therefore, situation us. 4 Finally, 1292(a)(1) country, permit officials valid, placed duty good faith reasonable efforts it, himself asserted violation properly obtained. Read background, did nothing more inform what consider sufficient attempts cannot imagine prosecuted produced required attempting additional provisions added anything, less onerous. They convert into injunctive order. 5 Reversed. that: 'I. (respondent) denied. 'II. (Respondent) produce, exception list members, Federal Los Angeles, California, September 11, papers Ryan Investment, Itd., Nairobi, Kenya, Mawingo, Ltd., Nanyuki Mount Safari Club, referred * (respondent). 'III. shall forthwith Companies these provided unable Department and/or Treasury inspect copies records.' App. 63—64. statute provides, pertinent part, 'The courts appeals jurisdiction from: (1) Interlocutory orders district granting, continuing, modifying, refusing dissolving injunctions *.' event, still object introduction subpoenaed material fruits trial. 255, 1416 (1966). Walker Birmingham, 388 307, 87 1824, 18 1210 (1967), contrary. Our sought petitioners' convictions based upon availability earlier stage.

Category: 8