The power of discovery
Focused on the use of Section 1782
– in international disputes
How can we help?
28 U.S.C. § 1782 (Section 1782) is a powerful tool available to obtain broad, US-style discovery for use in pending or even contemplated proceedings in foreign or international tribunals – the statute allows an “interested party” to depose and serve document requests on persons – or entities residing or “found” in the US.
In short, parties can bring to bear the power of US discovery in foreign proceedings that may lack similar tools, including civil or criminal actions in foreign courts, and, at least in some circumstances, investor-state arbitrations. Notwithstanding the US Supreme Court’s recent holding in the consolidated ZF Automotive US, Inc. v. Luxshare, Ltd. and AlixPartners, LLP v.
The Fund for Protection of Investors’ Rights in Foreign States, which barred use of Section 1782 to support international commercial arbitrations, Section 1782 remains a vital tool in complex commercial cross-border litigation.
Aerospace and Aviation
In a complex, multi-jurisdictional dispute related to the supply and maintenance of in-flight entertainment systems for several leading Middle East airlines and spanning several arbitral institutions and courts, securing dismissal of more than US$1.6 billion in claims asserted against our French and California-based clients after removing the claims from California state court to federal court and then compelling arbitration.
Representing a leading developer and manufacturer of in-flight entertainment systems in connection with a complex, multi-jurisdictional dispute involving patent infringement actions in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, and an action in the US for discovery pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1782. We won successively at both the trial and appellate courts. In re Lufthansa Technik AG, No. SAMC 19-00016JVS(KESx), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 231675 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 4, 2020) (denying Motion for Review); Lufthansa Technik AG v. Thales Avionics, Inc., No. 20-56293, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 36660 (9th Cir. Dec. 13, 2021) (affirming).
Manufacturing and Industrial
Successfully representing our French client, one of the world’s largest aerial work platform manufacturing companies,
in parallel actions pending before the ICDR and a US federal court in Louisiana, and involving claims for more than US$30 million in connection with the manufacturing and sale of lift equipment. REQ Assignment for the Benefit of Creditors LLC v. Haulotte Group SA, No. 2:18-cv-11551 (E.D. La. Oct. 15, 2019).
Successfully represented Valmont Industries, a Nebraska-based global leader of engineered products and services for energy and communications infrastructure, against a US$100 million claim against our client in federal court in Delaware by a Turkish entity alleging theft of trade secrets and key employees. We defeated the emergency motion for preliminary injunction and then successfully compelled arbitration of the dispute. Mitas Endustri Sanayi Ticaret A.S. v. Valmont Indus., Civil Action No. 20-1285-CFC, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139528 (D. Del. July 27, 2021).
Successfully representing a Central Asian bank in an arbitration with its partner arising from unauthorized sale of a jointly owned cardboard factory and in related proceedings in Eastern Europe, Cypriot and BVI courts.
Representing a Swiss-based multinational company and its Serbian philanthropist founder, president, and CEO in multi-jurisdictional litigation in the US and Europe in connection with defamatory statements and interference with business opportunities, and twice securing reversal and remand
of the US federal court action. Jankovic v. International Crisis Group, 593 F.3d 22 (D.C. Cir. 2010), rehearing en banc denied (Mar. 31, 2010); Jankovic v. International Crisis Group, 494 F.3d 1080 (D.C. Cir. 2007).
Confirming an arbitration award against
the Government of Romania and obtained
a judgment of more than US$330 million. Micula v. Government of Romania, 404 F. Supp. 3d 265 (D.D.C. 2019).
Defense and Security
Winning more than US$62 million in claims on behalf of a Fortune 500 multinational against the Greek government in an ICC arbitration seated in Athens and arising from installation of the security system for the 2004 Athens Olympics, while also defeating more than US$200 million in set-offs brought against the company in a hotly political matter involving broad allegations of corruption and government misconduct. ICC Case No. 16394/GZ/MHM. We enforced the award in the Supreme Court of Greece and in US federal court (SAIC v. The Hellenic Republic, CA No. 13-cv-1070, 2017 WL 65821 (D.D.C. Jan. 5, 2017), amended (D.D.C. 2018)), and collecting a judgment against the Greek Government in US federal court totaling more than US$58 million (Leidos, Inc. v. Hellenic Republic, 881 F.3d 213 (D.C. Cir. 2018)).
Defeating more than US$51 million in claims and winning multiple counterclaims on behalf of a Fortune 100 global security company in a Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (CRCICA) arbitration against a privatized aviation industry entity of the Egyptian government.
Favorably resolving a US$30 million suit for a US arms manufacturer against a German gun dealer involving alleged violations of international laws of war in the delivery of
a weapons system. Orbital ATK, Inc., et al.
v. Heckler & Koch GmbH, No. 17-3033
(8th Cir. July 16, 2018), International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR); Orbital ATK Inc. et al. v. Heckler & Koch GmbH, CA No. 0:17-cv-00250, (D. Minn. July 11, 2018).
Obtaining a favorable resolution for a global aerospace and defense technology company in a contractual dispute with an Egyptian government entity over performance and delivery of a defense radar equipment system, in which the Egyptian government entity refused to pay.
Energy
Obtaining for our Lebanon-based clients total dismissal in the “Rocket Docket” Eastern District of Virginia US federal court of fraud and other tort claims brought by a leading global energy trader from Switzerland and related to the sale and delivery of more than US$100 million in oil from Iraq. Gunvor SA
v. Kayablian et al., No. 1:18:-cv-00934, (E.D. Va. Oct. 19, 2018); Gunvor SA v. Kayablian et al., 948 F.3d 214 (4th Cir. 2020).
Obtaining dismissal with prejudice of claims totaling more than US$45 million against a US contractor brought by a foreign government alleging fraud, FCPA violations, environmental damage and product liability. Government of the Dominican Republic v. AES et al., Civil Action No. 1:06-cv-313 (E.D. Va. 2007).
Technology
Successfully arguing novel issues of international arbitration law and constitutional due process to establish jurisdiction in the United States over a South African entity to enforce an international arbitration award worth more than US$100 million. Telcordia Tech, Inc. v. Telkom SA Ltd, 458 F.3d 172 (3d Cir. 2006), cert. denied, 549 US 1206 (2007).
Obtaining total dismissal for a UK-based attraction ticketing and queuing technology provider and its US subsidiary in a suit involving allegations of an antitrust conspiracy among our clients and an Austrian ticket and access technology company. Charych v. Siriusware, Inc., 790 Fed. Appx. 299 (2d Cir. 2019).
Representing a Chinese investment firm in an action to confirm and enforce an arbitral award amounting to more than US$100 million issued by the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) in an arbitration against a mobile phone technology provider. Shanghai Qichengyueming Investment Partnership Enterprise v. Jia Yueting, CA No. 2:18-cv-07723-SJO-JPR (C.D. Cal. 2018).
Transportation
Representing entities in North America, Europe, and the Middle East against an international consortium in a US$190 million dispute arising from a high-profile rail project.
Representing a major Canadian rail transportation provider in a politically charged dispute, including in an ad hoc arbitration, concerning installation of the public transit system for the City of Edmonton, and claims against the city for tens of millions of dollars.
Finance
Favorably resolving defamation claims for a Latvian financial institution in US federal court action involving allegations of money laundering and related crimes.
Successfully representing a Central Asian client in a multi-party arbitration with its Albanian partner and Swiss bank involving issues of English, Swiss and Albanian law, and concerning an alleged theft of a large volume of naphtha used as a collateral for a complex transaction.
Successfully representing a French entrepreneur in a US$40 million dispute against a US multinational company arising from unlawful termination of a joint venture between the parties and implicating issuing of public policy, the US FCPA and Venezuelan currency exchange laws.
Real Estate
Successfully representing an Eastern Europe real estate development business and its executive in connection with an arbitration before the London Court of International Arbitration concerning a dispute related to a large real estate development project in Eastern Europe and a related discovery action under 28 U.S.C. 1782 brought in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
Enforcing a multimillion-dollar arbitral award against a Mexican entity on behalf of a major real estate development firm.
Government Contracting
Successfully confirming an arbitration award issued by the International Chamber of Commerce’s International Court of Arbitration against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) for breach of contract and related claims against the DRC in connection with our client’s efforts to improve and modernize the DRC’s customs department. Customs and Tax Consultancy LLC v. Democratic Republic of Congo, Civ. No. 18-1408 (D.D.C.).
Favorably resolving for our US government contractor client breach of contract claims related to a failed Kuwait joint venture. Systems Products & Solutions, Inc. v. R4, Inc., 1:08-cv-00847-TSE-TRJ (E.D.VA).
© Eversheds Sutherland Ltd. 2023. All rights reserved. Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP is part of a global legal practice, operating through various separate and distinct legal entities, under Eversheds Sutherland. For a full description of the structure and a list of offices, visit eversheds-sutherland.com.
eversheds-sutherland.com
What happens next?
Printable PDF
Why work with us?
Eversheds Sutherland’s Complex Cross-Border Litigation and International Commercial Arbitration Group has deep experience with Section 1782 proceedings—having both brought and defended against 1782 actions in courts across the country—and we regularly handle complex, cross-border disputes that involve parallel and multi-jurisdictional proceedings.
We are well-versed in the arguments and dynamics peculiar to 1782 actions and also how to effectively and creatively use or manage a Section 1782 proceeding within a broader dispute to best position our clients to achieve their business goals.
Who do we work with?
Our clients come from and do business in every region across the world. They include leading multinationals as well as small and medium-size companies that conduct cross-border business.
Our clients operate in a wide variety of sectors, including:
Aviation and aerospace
Defense and security
Construction and infrastructure
Energy
Government contracting
Technology
Manufacturing and industrial
Transportation
Chemicals and plastics
Mining
Pharmaceuticals
Finance
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Representative experience
Successfully defended a leading developer and manufacturer of in-flight entertainment systems in a Section 1782 action connected
to a complex global intellectual property dispute involving multiple court actions in Europe and Asia.
Successfully defended a real estate developer and its executive against efforts to obtain extensive discovery from them in a Section 1782 action for use in a proceeding concerning a high-profile real estate project in Eastern Europe.
Successfully used Section 1782 to obtain crucial discovery from a non-US resident after having him served with a subpoena while briefly in the US for a speaking engagement at a Washington DC-based international non-governmental organization.
For more information, contact one of the following members of our Complex Cross-Border Litigation and International Commercial Arbitration Group: