Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. U.S. District Court

Another Court Rejects Chinese Data Privacy Law as a Bar to U.S. Discovery

A second U.S. decision has held that China’s Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL) did not bar a U.S. discovery request because of an exception in the law for statutory obligations. As previously reported on TLB, a federal court in California held last year that the PIPL’s exception for transfers “necessary to fulfill statutory duties and responsibilities or…

Continue Reading

A Primer on Transnational Discovery

Discovery is a formal process in which each party gathers information relevant to its case. Transnational discovery may be necessary to obtain information located abroad for use in U.S. courts or to obtain information located in the United States for use in foreign courts. As a general matter, courts may order parties subject to their…

Continue Reading

Throwback Thursday: Blackmun’s Prescient Dissent in Aérospatiale

In Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. U.S. District Court (1987), the Supreme Court held that U.S. courts need not treat the procedures set forth in the Hague Evidence Convention as the exclusive or even the primary means for managing discovery of evidence located abroad. Four justices dissented in part in a remarkably prescient opinion authored…

Continue Reading

China’s New Data Security Law in U.S. Discovery Disputes

Discovery litigation regarding the impact of China’s Data Security Law (“DSL”), which took effect less than a year ago in September 2021, has steadily increased in U.S. courts, and it is likely to continue to increase over the coming months and years.  One driver of this litigation is the uncertainty created by the newness of…

Continue Reading

Court Holds that China’s Data Privacy Law Does Not Bar U.S. Discovery

A recent decision held that China’s new data privacy law does not bar compliance with U.S. discovery orders. In Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. Syntronic AB, Chief Magistrate Judge Joseph Spero reasoned that there was no conflict between his discovery order and China’s Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL) because of an exception in the PIPL for…

Continue Reading

Ingrid (Wuerth) Brunk

Vanderbilt Law School
ingrid.wuerth@vanderbilt.eduEmail

William Dodge

UC Davis School of Law
wsdodge@ucdavis.eduEmail

Maggie Gardner

Cornell Law School
mgardner@cornell.eduEmail

John F. Coyle

University of North Carolina School of Law
jfcoyle@email.unc.eduEmail

Zachary D. Clopton

Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
zclopton@law.northwestern.eduEmail

Matt Slovin

Bio | Posts

Noah Buyon

Duke University School of Law
Bio | Posts

Will Moon

University of Maryland
Bio | Posts

William K. McGoughran

Vanderbilt Law School
Bio | Posts

Chimène Keitner

UC Davis School of Law
Bio | Posts

Catherine Amirfar

Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Bio | Posts

Justin R. Rassi

Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Bio | Posts

Isabelle Glimcher

Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Bio | Posts

Ben Köhler

Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law
Bio | Posts

Aaron D. Simowitz

Willamette University College of Law
Bio | Posts