Judge Won't Name Foreign Corporation Fighting Mueller Subpoena
Chief Judge Beryl Howell did agree to unseal redacted versions of other records in the case, including briefs, transcripts and orders.
April 01, 2019 at 06:39 PM
3 minute read
Beryl Howell during her confirmation hearing in July 2010. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM
A federal judge in Washington has declined to reveal the identity of a foreign-owned corporation that's spent months fighting a subpoena brought by Special Counsel Robert Mueller III.
U.S. District Chief Judge Beryl Howell of the District of Columbia ruled Monday that she would not “at this time” direct the release of information that publicly identifies the company, but the judge did agree to unseal redacted versions of other records in the case, including briefs, transcripts and orders.
In her ruling, Howell pointed to a local criminal rule that allows judges to make records public, so long as they don't reveal matters occurring before a grand jury. Howell also noted that the grand jury involved in the subpoena matter was still ongoing.
“Redactions must thus be applied to maintain the secrecy of all matters occurring before a grand jury,” Howell wrote in her 12-page ruling.
Howell's ruling came after a March 27 hearing, during which a lawyer for the government told the judge that the grand jury convened by Mueller was “continuing robustly.” The U.S. also conceded that local criminal rules permitted the public release of redacted briefs and transcripts.
The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, represented by Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher partner Theodore Boutrous, had led the effort to unseal records. Boutrous argued at the March hearing that there was a “strong public interest” for the judge to exercise her discretion to unseal records in the case and identify the corporation.
The company at the center of the mystery, represented by Alston & Bird, has mounted a months-long subpoena challenge, arguing that it cannot be compelled to provide information to the grand jury.
The foreign government-owned corporation has incurred a $50,000 daily fine for contempt of court since January after refusing to comply with the grand jury's subpoena. The company argued that it is protected by sovereign immunity and that complying with the grand jury subpoena would violate the laws of its home country.
Read the ruling here:
Read more: Mueller Grand Jury 'Continuing Robustly,' Prosecutor Tells Judge
Jessie Liu Withdraws From Consideration for No. 3 Post at Main Justice
AG Barr Preps 400-Page Mueller Report for 'Mid-April' Release
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
4th Circuit Revives Racial Harassment Lawsuit Against North Carolina School District
3 minute read
Fenwick and Baker & Hostetler Add DC Partners, as Venable and Brownstein Hire Policy Advisers
2 minute read
DOJ, 10 State AGs File Amended Antitrust Complaint Against RealPage and Big Landlords
4 minute read
Special Counsel Jack Smith Prepares Final Report as Trump Opposes Its Release
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
