On Nоvember 7, 1947, The Ohio Oil Company, one of the defendants in this case, filed a motion to rеquire plaintiff to produce for inspection, certain documents, including repоrts of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, correspondence, etc., with various persons, all as stated in said motion, which is made part hereof. Similar motions werе filed by the other defendants. The Court, having recalled and quashed certain subpoenas duces tecum, obtained ex parte by the Magnolia Petroleum Company, аnother defendant, for reasons stated in the written opinion of January 2, 1948, D.C.,
Counsel for other defendants had filed similar motions to produce and, at the several hearings, appeared and joined in the contentions of The Ohio Oil Cоmpany.
Thereafter, on August 26, 1948, the said The Ohio Oil Company filed a motion to vacate the said order of April 21, 1948, which had denied its motion to produce and this was argued and submittеd on September 17, 1948. Subsequently, the matter was, on February 21, 1949, reset for hearing on March 11, 1949, at which time, having heard further arguments, it was ordered that the Government produce the dоcuments requested by The Ohio Oil Company “with the right to submit to the Court for ruling any documents they desired to claim to be privileged.”
On May 10, 1949,' plaintiff filed a motion to vacate said order of March 11, 1949, and on June 15, following, it was heard and defendants declined to accеpt the Government’s offer of partial- compliance by filing an abstract of factual information contained in the reports of the Federal Bureau of Investigаtion, and the Court indicated its purpose to adhere to the ruling requiring the Government to produce the documents. At this time counsel for the Government requested time to сontact the Attorney General, before the Court finally ruled on the said motion to vacate, which was granted, and on the following day, June 16, 1949, when the hearing was resumed and thе Court denied the said motion to vacate, counsel for the Government was given additional time to consult with the Attorney General as to whether the Court’s order to produce would be complied with, and the question of what was to be done in case оf refusal'was reset for July 7, 1949. ■
On the last mentioned date, counsel for the Government aрpeared and submitted further authorities as to the right of the Attorney General to clаim and for himself determine the question of privilege as to the documents called for in the motions to produce. Thereupon, after considering said cases, the Court stated from the Bench that to sustain this contention, would in effect, amount to an abdication of the Court’s duty to decide the matter and leave it entirely in the hands of the Attorney General; that if the documents were submitted to the Court, with such claims as to
It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that this cause be dismissed for the failure of plaintiff to comply with the Court’s order to produce for its inspection the documents called for in the motions, so it could determine the question of privilege under the law.