er firms and associated persons typically must comply with FINRA arbitrators’ orders or else risk sanctions from FINRA (FINRA Rule 13513; for more information, seeFINRA Industry Arbitration: A Step-by-Step Guideon Practical Law).Most nonparties, however, have not agreed to the jurisdiction of the arbitrator or the forum. In those cases, an arbitrator’s subpoena typically may be enforced only by filing an action under the Federal Arbitration Act or, if not preempted, an applicable state arbitration statute. The ability to obtain pretrial discovery by subpoena in those circumstances may be limited and varies by circuit. (For more information, seeCompelling Evidence from Nonparties in Arbitration in the USon Practical Law.)The rules governing government and regulatory subpoenas vary widely. For example, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure generally apply to subpoenas issued from grand jury investigations and subpoenas to testify in a criminal case (for example, Fed. R. Crim. P. 6 and 17) and address requirements such as:The form and format of the subpoena (for example, Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(a)).Who may issue a subpoena and how they may issue it (for example, Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(a), (f)).What information, documents, and testimony may be demanded in a subpoena (for example, Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c), (h)).Service methods and procedures (for example, Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(d), (e) (requiring personal service of subpoenas in criminal cases and permitting service on US parties anywhere in the US)).Some agencies and organizations have their own rules governing the issuance of subpoenas and information requests (for example, FINRA Rule 8210 and SEC Enforcement Manual § 3.2.6). Similarly, FINRA, the SEC, and other regulatory agencies have their own rules for responding and objecting to subpoenas (for example, FINRA Rule 8210 and SEC Enforcement Manual § 3.2.7). These rules may impose fewer service and formatting requirements than the federal rules because the agencies that issue inf

There is no time frame established for this review since it may take a substantial amount of time, especially with encrypted drives. . . .Regarding third parties, the court may issue a subpoena under F. R. Crim. P. Rule 17 for a third party to produce records at trial or at another time and place. This is typically a bank or cell phone carrier but can be any non-party thought to be in possession of relevant information.

However, the instant discussion is limited to the attorney-client privilege issue as it relates to communications with PR firms and public statements.3 Opp’n to Mot. to Compel, at 16, United States v. Kay, No. 4:20-cr-269 (N.D. Tex. Sep. 7, 2021), ECF No. 58.4 “Angels Statement,” MLB.com (June 29, 2021), https://www.mlb.com/amp/press-release/press-release-angels-statement-x3235.html.5 Order Granting Request to Unseal, United States v. Kay, No. 4:20-cr-269 (N.D. Tex. Nov. 9, 2021), ECF No. 84.6 Sealed Order Denying Motion to Compel Production, at 4, United States v. Kay, No. 4:20-cr-269 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 7, 2021), ECF No. 67.7 Sealed Order Denying Motion to Compel Production, at 4; see also Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c).8 Opp’n to Mot. to Compel, at 17 n.9.9United States v. Kovel, 296 F.2d 918, 921 (2d Cir. 1961).10Breuder v. Bd. of Trustees of Cmty. Coll. Dist. No. 502, No. 15 CV 9323, 2021 WL 4283464, at *7 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 21, 2021) (internal quotation omitted).

o the person or left at the premises. Law enforcement then conducts the authorized search and seizes the property per the warrant and are required to provide the court with an inventory of what was seized.F.R. Crim. P. Rule 41 then establishes a two-step process when ESI is involved. The first step is the seizure and then a subsequent review of the ESI which must be consistent with the warrant. There is no time frame established for this review since it may take a substantial amount of time, especially with encrypted drives. The government provides the defense with an inventory return form, which describes the physical storage media seized or copied. Anything not on the inventory can be challenged if it is introduced in evidence. Additionally, F. R. Crim. P. Rule 16 allows the defense to discover any ESI that the government has in its possession that is material to its case or that the government intends to use at trial. Regarding third parties, the court may issue a subpoena under F. R. Crim. P. Rule 17 for a third party to produce records at trial or at another time and place. This is typically a bank or cell phone carrier but can be any non-party thought to be in possession of relevant information. The court may then allow the defense to inspect all or part of the ESI.b.Common Data Types Data in criminal cases is typically far less diverse than the civil field. Email tends to be the most prominent data type followed by a variety of other standard text reports, memos, etc. Email will most often be produced in native format (more on that below) and other documents tend to be rendered in PDF. This material can be easily searched using a number of low-cost text search programs or even the search capability found in the programs themselves. Likewise, several data types which have received much attention in the press do not present serious technical challenges. The first, IoT devices, have been much discussed but not yet been a major data factor. In the Fitbit case which gained some no