In re: Green Development Corporation S.A. de C.V., 1:15-cv-02985

Background

Petitioner Green Development Corp. (Honduran corporation) seeks § 1782 discovery in Maryland from U.S. resident Michael McNicholas to rebut allegedly defamatory claims in an article he authored that was (allegedly) sent ex parte to the Honduran Supreme Court.
Petitioner’s Honduran litigation produced favorable judgments and is now before the Honduran Supreme Court on appeal; Petitioner wants U.S. discovery to submit favorable evidence to that court.
McNicholas is a Maryland resident, an author on maritime/security topics, and not a party to the Honduran litigation.
Petitioner requests documents, deposition testimony, identities of sources and contributors, and information about a reportedly non-public Department of Defense report (Operation Cazando Anguilas).
Magistrate Judge Gesner found statutory § 1782 jurisdictional requirements met but denied the application under Intel’s discretionary factors, citing lack of demonstrated need, uncertain receptivity by the Honduran court, First Amendment/journalist privilege concerns, potential national-security sensitivity, and undue burden.
The magistrate recommended denial, ordered the matter sealed for 60 days, and directed service of the report to McNicholas; objections due within 14 days.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 1782 jurisdictional requirements are met	§ 1782 applies because McNicholas "resides" in this district and discovery is for use in Honduran proceeding	McNicholas not represented; implied objection that relevance and use in Honduras are uncertain	Jurisdictional prerequisites satisfied (resident, foreign proceeding, interested person) but outcome turns on Intel discretionary factors
Whether discovery is justified under Intel factor 1 (participant status / need)	McNicholas is outside Honduran court’s reach so U.S. discovery is necessary to obtain relevant evidence	McNicholas is not shown to have unique relevant information; evidence about CEO/Amdani likely obtainable elsewhere	Denied: petitioner failed to show McNicholas has information beyond Honduran court’s reach or unique relevance
Whether discovery is appropriate under Intel factor 2 (receptivity of foreign tribunal)	Evidence would be presented to Honduran Supreme Court to rebut ex parte submission	No evidence Honduran Supreme Court requested or would accept such supplemental discovery on appeal; petitioner gave no procedural path	Denied: petitioner failed to show Honduran court’s receptivity or need for U.S.-sourced evidence
Whether discovery should be denied under Intel factors 3 and 4 (circumvention, privileges, burden)	Needs to probe motives, identify sources, and obtain report content to rebut allegations	Request implicates First Amendment reporter’s privilege, possible national-security protections for DoD report, and is intrusive/burdensome	Denied: significant First Amendment concerns, potential classification/national-security issues, and request is unduly intrusive/burdensome

Key Cases Cited

Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241 (governs discretionary factors for § 1782 discovery)
Ashcraft v. Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 282 (recognizes reporter’s constitutional privilege in the Fourth Circuit)
Church of Scientology Int'l v. Daniels, 992 F.2d 1329 (upholds protection against compelled disclosure of press materials)
United States v. Sterling, 724 F.3d 482 (acknowledges limits of reporter privilege in criminal cases)
In re Chevron Corp., 754 F. Supp. 2d 254 (discusses § 1782 practice and discretionary considerations)
In re Veiga, 746 F. Supp. 2d 8 (considers foreign receptivity and exhaustion-related factors under § 1782)
LaRouche v. Nat'l Broad. Co., 780 F.2d 1134 (sets three-part test for compel of journalists: relevance, alternative means, compelling interest)