- Affirmative Recovery
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Childhood Sexual Abuse Litigation
- Class Action Litigation
- Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Ediscovery
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Restructuring and Business Bankruptcy
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Disputes
- Litigation Support Services
-
December 4, 2019State of Minnesota Sues JUUL
-
November 26, 2019Minnesota Lawyer Honors Two Robins Kaplan Attorneys as 2019 Attorneys of the Year
-
November 21, 2019Firm, Attorney Stacey Slaughter Recognized by National Law Journal
-
December 10, 2019Youth Frontiers Ethical Leadership Luncheon
-
December 11, 2019Mid-Minnesota Legal Aid Associates’ Campaign Kickoff
-
December 11, 2019Minnesota ICON Honors Award Ceremony
-
November 2019CLASS ACTION: Experts weigh in on significant class action developments
-
November 15, 20192019 Case Developments: Are Massachusetts Insurers Required To Be Perfect In An Imperfect World?
-
November 15, 2019Artificial Intelligence v. General Data Protection Regulation: Complex Risks in Changing Times
The 9th Circ.'s Rule 6(e) Test For Private Antitrust Cases
October 20, 2015
Law360, NEW YORK, October 9, 2015—In In re Optical Disk Drive Antitrust Litigation ("ODD"),[1] the Ninth Circuit recently clarified when materials created as part of a criminal government investigation should be barred from disclosure in civil litigation under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e). While over half of the federal circuits that have analyzed the issue coalesced behind the fact-intensive "effect test" (described herein), the Ninth Circuit decisively announced in ODD that it would not endorse that test. Instead, the Ninth Circuit created a new, ostensibly straightforward, approach to determine whether materials are protected under Rule 6(e).
All Content © 2003‐2015, Portfolio Media, Inc.
The articles on our Website include some of the publications and papers authored by our attorneys, both before and after they joined our firm. The content of these articles should not be taken as legal advice.
Related Professionals
Kellie Lerner
Partner
Michelle Zolnoski
Related Publications
Related News
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.