Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.

Docket No.: 02-572
Certiorari Granted: Nov 10 2003
Argued: April 20, 2004
Decided: June 21, 2004

Topics:

28 U.S.C. 1782, Privacy, Administrative Procedure, Antitrust, Civil Procedure, Due Process, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Natural Resources, RICO, abuse of discretion, antitrust, harmless error, ineffective assistance of counsel, judicial review, sentencing guidelines

PartyNames: Intel Corporation v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Petitioner: Intel Corporation
Respondent: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Citation: CA 9, 292 F.3d 664. QUESTIONS PRESENTED: 28 U.S.C. § 1782 authorizes the federal district courts to grant discovery to"interested person[s]" for use "in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal, including criminal investigations conducted before formalaccusation."
Supreme Court Docket

Intel Corporation
v.
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
542 U.S. 241 (2004)
Background:

: 28 U.S.C. § 1782 authorizes the federal district courts to grant discovery to"interested person[s]" for use "in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal, including criminal investigations conducted before formalaccusation."

Question Presented:

1. Whether section 1782 authorizes a federal district court to provide a private person with discovery that the foreign jurisdiction itself does not authorize.2. Whether section 1782 allows civil discovery by a private person when no "proceeding" before a foreign "tribunal" is pending or even imminent.3. Whether section 1782 extends discovery rights in the United States to private non-litigants. CERT. GRANTED: 11/10/03 J. O'Connor took no part.

Question:

Does Section 1782 of Title 28 of U.S. Code authorize a federal district court to compel the release of material for use in a "foreign tribunal" when the foreign tribunal itself is unwilling to demand production of the material? Does Section 1782 authorize a federal district court to compel the release of material for a fact-finding investigation by the directorate general of the European Commission on the theory that the information may eventually lead to an investigation by a foreign tribunal?

Note:

. CA 9, 292 F.3d 664.

Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
ORAL ARGUMENT

April 20, 2004

Holding: affirmed
Decision: Decision: 7 votes for Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 1 vote(s) against
Vote: 7-1
Recused: J.,
Database Connection failed: SQLSTATE[HY000] [1045] Access denied for user 'restauz8_sophi'@'localhost' (using password: YES)