UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner,
v.
MICROSOFT CORPORATION, et al., Respondents.
United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
January 17, 2020.
January 17, 2020.
Editors Note
Applicable Law: 26 U.S.C. § 7402
Cause: 26 U.S.C. § 7402 IRS: Petition to Enforce IRS Summons
Nature of Suit: 890 Other Statutory Actions Source: PACER
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
United States of America, Petitioner, represented by Amy Matchison, US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Jeremy N. Hendon, US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TAX DIVISION, Noreene C. Stehlik, US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TAX DIVISION & James Edward Weaver, US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
Microsoft Corporation, Respondent, represented by Andrea Delgadillo Ostrovsky, CALFO EAKES & OSTROVSKY PLLC, Andrew P. Crousore, BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP, pro hac vice, Brian S. Prestes, BARLIT BECK HERMAN PALENCHAR & SCOTT LLP, pro hac vice, Daniel A. Rosen, BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP, pro hac vice, Mirelle R. Oldak, BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP, pro hac vice, Phillip Joseph Taylor, BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP, pro hac vice, Robert B. Tannenbaum, BARTLIT BECK HERMAN PALENCHAR & SCOTT, pro hac vice, Sean W. Gallagher, BARTLIT BECK HERMAN PALENCHAR & SCOTT, pro hac vice, Patricia A. Eakes, CALFO EAKES & OSTROVSKY PLLC & Robert B. Mitchell, K&L GATES LLP.
KPMG LLP, Respondent, represented by George E. Greer, ORRICK HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE.
Ernst & Young, LLP, Respondent, represented by Stephen M. Rummage, DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE.
Microsoft Corporation, Intervenor, represented by Andrea Delgadillo Ostrovsky, CALFO EAKES & OSTROVSKY PLLC, Andrew P. Crousore, BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP, pro hac vice, Daniel A. Rosen, BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP, pro hac vice, Hugh Frederick Bangasser, K&L GATES LLP, Mark A. Oates, BAKER & MCKENZIE, pro hac vice, Mirelle R. Oldak, BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP, pro hac vice, Phillip Joseph Taylor, BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP, pro hac vice, Patricia A. Eakes, CALFO EAKES & OSTROVSKY PLLC & Robert B. Mitchell, K&L GATES LLP.
ORDER FOLLOWING COURT'S IN CAMERA REVIEW
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ, Chief District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Following Microsoft's Brief Regarding Privileged Documents Still in Dispute (Dkt. #140), the Court ordered in camera review of certain documents. Dkt. #185. Having reviewed the documents at issue, the Court rules...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
