United States Second Circuit

Work product claim, unsupported by any in camera identification or submission of responsive documents, was too conclusory to show a real concern that production will reveal counsel's thought processes and strategies; thus, order compelling compliance with grand jury subpoenas is affirmed.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/28/2003
• Published 01/29/2003

Judges

• RAGGI, Circuit Judge., Before:  KEARSE, SOTOMAYOR, RAGGI, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• James Benjamin,Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, L.L.P., New York, NY (Robert A. Johnson, Rex S. Heinke, Mark J. MacDougall, Heather J. Pellegrino, on the brief), for Respondents-Appellants., George S. Canellos, Assistant United States Attorney, Southern District of New York, New York, NY (James B. Comey, United States Attorney;  Peter G. Neiman and Andrew J. Ceresney, Assistant United States Attorneys, on the brief), for Movant-Appellee.