Search this site

An overview of 28 U.S.C. § 1782, one of the most powerful discovery tools available to foreign litigants, allowing evidence gathering in US federal courts for use in international proceedings. Section 1782 Remains One of the Most Powerful Discovery Tools as Appellate Courts Uphold its Use in Aid of Private Commercial Arbitration Open Legal Insights Open June 10, 2020 4 minutes read Sequor Law 28 U.S.C. § 1782, known colloquially as “Section 1782,” is a federal statute that allows foreign litigants and interested persons to request judicial assistance from U.S. federal courts to obtain evidence for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal. Section 1782 is highly relevant to a wide array of legal practitioners, both within and outside the U.S., as federal courts have concluded that evidence obtained through Section 1782 may be used in civil, criminal, probate, bankruptcy, marital, administrative, and regulatory cases. In short, if your client is not using Section 1782 as part of its litigation strategy, there is a good chance that your client’s opponent is using it to your client’s disadvantage. Section 1782 is an alternative to the slower, and oftentimes cumbersome, cross-border discovery mechanisms such as letters rogatory and diplomatic or consular channels, because it can be pursued directly by the litigant or interested party without the involvement of the foreign court or tribunal or of the governmental authorities making up the traditional channels. Section 1782 was enacted decades ago and was revised extensively in 1964, but its widespread use did not take off until after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2004 ruling in Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. against Intel Corp. , or “Intel” as the seminal decision is widely known. In the Intel case, the Supreme Court clarified the statutory requirements that an applicant has to satisfy to obtain evidence using Section 1782 as well as a number of discretionary factors courts should also consider. If the applicant is successful, it can obtain U.S.-style discovery from persons or entities located where the application is filed (in the form of site inspections, requests for production of documents, or deposition testimony under oath) for use in the foreign proceeding. Typical Section 1782 subpoena targets include businesses (including affiliated companies and subsidiaries), financial institutions, professionals such as lawyers and accountants, brokers, escrow agents, art galleries and auction houses, former employees, and many more. This incredibly powerful tool can also be pursued on an ex parte basis (at least initially) and does not require the applicant to prove that she has exhausted her domestic evidence gathering tools in the foreign case or, significantly, that the evidence will be admissible in the foreign proceeding. One issue that has been contested since Intel was decided is whether Section 1782 can be used in support of a private commercial arbitration (as opposed to treaty-based arbitrations where the use of Section 1782 is clearly supported by the applicable case law). Recently, the Sixth Circuit and Fourth Circuit Courts of Appeals broke with the Second and Fifth Circuits and determined that interested parties may rely on Section 1782 to obtain evidence for use in a privately constituted international arbitration proceeding. In September 2019, the Sixth Circuit analyzed the definition and interpretation of the word “tribunal” at length (relying on the ordinary meaning of the word, several dictionary definitions, the use of the word in legal writing, and an examination of the statute’s text, context and structure) and held that the language of Section 1782 unambiguously “includes private commercial arbitral panels established pursuant to contract and having the authority to issue decisions and bind the parties.” Abdul Latif Jameel Transportation Co. Ltd. v. FedEx Corp. , 939 F.3d 710, 723 (6th Cir. 2019). A few months later, the Fourth Circuit followed. In March 2020, the Fourth Circuit agreed that private arbitral tribunals are “foreign tribunals” within the meaning of Section 1782, and rejected a litany of policy arguments advanced by the respondent. Servotronics, Inc. v. Boeing Co. , 954 F.3d 209 (4th Cir. 2020). Although district court decisions have been deeply divided on the issue since Intel, there is now strong momentum gathering at the appellate level favoring the use of Section 1782 in aid of private commercial arbitration. For example, California district courts had uniformly followed the Second and Fifth Circuits in holding that an applicant may not obtain evidence through Section 1782 for use in a private commercial arbitration—until recently. In February 2020, a federal court in the Northern District of California adopted the reasoning and conclusion of the Sixth Circuit’s decision regarding Section 1782’s application to private international arbitration. HRC-Hainan Holding Company, LLC v. Yihan Hu , No. 19-mc-80277, 2020 WL 906719 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2020). That case is now on appeal, and the Ninth Circuit is positioned to rule on the issue. In sum, the already powerful Section 1782 has seen its applicability bolstered by two of the highest courts in the U.S. indicating that Section 1782 will remain an indispensable tool in any international lawyer’s toolbox for the foreseeable future. About the authors: Arnie Lacayo ( alacayo@sequorlaw.com ) is a Shareholder and Cristina Vicens ( cvicens@sequorlaw.com ) is an Attorney at Sequor Law. Lacayo and Vicens focus their practices on investigations, financial fraud and corruption-related asset recovery cases, as well as cross-border insolvency. Both Lacayo and Vicens have extensive experience with the Section 1782 statute, including in some of the most-cited cases in the U.S. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight Aug 17, 2026 3 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Carolina M. Rosso “Pour faire de grandes choses, il ne faut pas être un si grand génie... Firm News Jun 23, 2026 3 minutes Sequor Law Welcomes Attorney Carolina M. Rosso to Its Expanding International Litigation and Asset Recovery Team Sequor Law is pleased to announce that Carolina M. Rosso has joined the firm as an Attorney. Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more..

Partner. Former Miami-Dade prosecutor. Admitted to 6 U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals. Prior experience at two major international law firms Joseph B. Rome Partner jrome@sequorlaw.com (+1) 305-372-8282, Ext. 210 vCard Practice Areas International Commercial Litigation Asset Recovery Judgment & Arbitral Award Enforcement International Arbitration Corruption & Proceeds of Crime Recovery High-Net-Worth Disputes Financial Fraud Joseph B. Rome Partner jrome@sequorlaw.com (+1) 305-372-8282, Ext. 210 vCard Education New York University School of Law, J.D. (2013) Jessup International Moot Court, International Round 2013, 32nd top oralist out of 500+ competitors Journal of International Law & Politics, Senior Developments Editor OUTLaw, Co-Chair; Asia Law Society, Vice-President Alternative Spring Break internship with Orleans Public Defenders, New Orleans, Louisiana Civil litigation externship clinic at U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York Columbia University, M.A. (2010) Regional East Asian Studies with Chinese History focus Columbia University, B.A. (2007) Double major in Architecture and East Asian Studies Admissions New York Florida U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 1st Circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 5th Circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 6th Circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 9th Circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 11th Circuit Associations & Memberships Vice-Chair, Anticorruption Committee, International Law Section, American Bar Association Languages English Spanish Chinese Japanese Location Miami Favorite Quote: “La verdad adelgaza y no quiebra, y siempre anda sobre la mentira como el aceite sobre el agua. ” - Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra Bio Publications & Presentations Representative Matters Media Joseph Rome, a partner at Sequor Law, focuses his practice on international arbitration and litigation, judgment and arbitral award collection, asset recovery, corruption and proceeds of crime recovery, and financial fraud. Prior to joining Sequor Law, Joseph was an “A” level prosecutor for the Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office focusing primarily on attempted murders, gun crimes, and serious sexual assaults from the investigation stage through trial. He was also a member of the Police Accountability and Integrity Task Force, Hate Crimes Unit, and Traffic Homicide Unit. Joseph previously worked for two large, international law firms in New York and Miami. He represented international corporations and high-net-worth individuals in a broad range of high-stakes litigation and arbitration matters. Joseph earned his Juris Doctorate from New York University School of Law. During law school, he was a Jessup International Moot Court member, an editor of the Journal of International Law & Politics, and did externships with both the Orleans Public Defenders and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York. He also did a summer fellowship at the United Nations International Law Commission in Geneva, where he drafted speeches and statements for the Japanese representative. Sequor Law Promotes Juan J. Mendoza, Christopher A. Noel, and Joseph B. Rome to Partner Sequor Law bankruptcy courtroom victory DISH case Sequor Law Announces Promotion of Attorney Joseph Rome to Counsel Attorney Spotlight: Joseph Rome Joseph B. Rome Wins ThoughtLeaders4 FIRE Essay Competition Sequor Law continues to grow, adding another attorney to the team Published Decisions Novalpina Capital Partners I GP S.A.R.L v. Read , 149 F.4th 1092, 1095 (9th Cir. 2025) In re Exch. Union Co. , No. 24-mc-91645-ADB, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 257485, at *1 (D. Mass. Dec. 12, 2025) Dailane Invs. Ltd. v. Hig Capital LLC , No. 25-cv-20568-ALTMAN/LETT, 2025 LX 528597 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 24, 2025) Ex parte Klein , No. 1:23-mc-24630-CMA, 2025 LX 428674 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 17, 2025) In re Exch. Union Co ., No. 4:24-mc-80289-YGR, 2025 LX 321418 (N.D. Cal. July 22, 2025) Orion Engineered, GmbH Carbons v. Shufang Qin, No. 8:24-cv-02409-MRA-DFM, 2025 LX 333118 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 1, 2025) In re Dailane Invs. Ltd., No. 1:22-cv-23619-ALTMAN/Reid, 2025 LX 379457 (S.D. Fla. May 5, 2025) In re Exch. Union Co. , No. 24-mc-91645-ADB, 2025 LX 150252 (D. Mass. Mar. 24, 2025) Orion Engineered Carbons, GmbH v. Shufang Qin , No. 24-CV-02409-MRA-DFM, 2025 LX 202051 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 21, 2025) Stati v. Republic of Kazakhstan , No. 1:19-MC-00382-PAE, 2025 LX 491175 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 28, 2025) Stati v. Republic of Kazakhstan , No. 24-2198, 2025 LX 231162 (2d Cir. Jan. 27, 2025) Frasers Grp. PLC v. Stanley , 95 F.4th 54 (2d Cir. 2024) In re Exchange Union Co. , No. 4:24-MC-80289-YGR, 2024 LX 127523 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2024) In re Pinewood Techs. Asia Pac. Ltd. for Judicial Assistance Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 , No. 24-60119-CIV-DIMITROULEAS/HUNT, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211317 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 19, 2024) Orion Engineered Carbons, GmbH v. Shufang Qin , No. 8:24-cv-02409-MRA-DFM, 2024 LX 151210 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 2024) Stati v. Republic of Kazakhstan , 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127325 (S.D.N.Y. July 17, 2024) In re Vinmar Overseas, Ltd. , 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98217 (S.D.N.Y. May 30, 2024) SEC v. Waldman , 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60665 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 14, 2019) Latta v. Otter, 779 F.3d 902 (9th Cir. 2015) De Leon v. Abbott , 791 F.3d 619 (5th Cir. 2015) Latta v. Otter , 771 F.3d 496 (9th Cir. 2014) Brenner v. Armstrong , Nos. 14-14061-AA, 14-14066-AA, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24725 (11th Cir. Dec. 3, 2014) Latta v. Otter , Nos. 14-35420, 14-35421, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 16057 (9th Cir. May 20, 2014) Tanco v. Haslam , No. 14-5297, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 22051 (6th Cir. Apr. 25, 2014) Publications Florida Bar International Section, International Judgment Recognition in an Age of North American Disunity , 41 International Law Quarterly 18-19, 56-57 (Fall 2025). New Tools in New Places: Digital Assets and a New Chinese Frontier (winning entry of FIRE’s Future Thought Leaders Essay Competition). Co-author, Chapter 3: Section 1782’s “For Use” Statutory Requirement in Obtaining Evidence for Use in International Tribunals under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 (Edward M. Mullins & Lawrence W. Newman eds., 2020). Presentations Digital Assets and Enforcement: Background, Challenges and the Adaptation of Court and Practitioner Strategies , Panelist, ThoughtLeaders4 FIRE, March 23, 2026 Strategies for Favorable Judgments: The Path to Success , Moderator, Offshore Alert Bangkok, March 11, 2026 The Art of the Collect: Mastering Judgment Enforcement , Panelist, Offshore Alert Bangkok, March 11, 2026 Cross-Border Asset Recovery Product Launch & Overseas Recovery Seminar , Keynote Speaker, Yingke Law Firm, Beijing, March 5, 2026 Cross-Border Recovery Seminar on Non-Performing Assets , Keynote Speaker, Hylands Law Firm, Shenzhen, March 2, 2026 29th Dacheng Criminal Forum - Asset Protection from a Global Perspective: Practical Exchange on Investment Disputes and Property Crime Recovery , Keynote Speaker, Dentons Beijing, September 25, 2025 Court Orders and Tools for Investigations and Freezing of Assets in Cross-Border Asset Recovery , ICC Fraudnet Seminar, Shanghai, September 20, 2025 International Investigations & Asset Recovery , Panelist Offshore Alert Bangkok, March 6, 2025 Litigating in Florida: Spotting International Issues from Beginning to End , Moderator, February 7, 2025 FIRE Starters Essay Competition Winner Presentation , Moderator, FIRE Starters Global Summit: Dublin, February 23, 2024 Decrypting Crypto: Reading the Runes , Panelist, London International Disputes Week, May 17, 2023 FIRE Starters Essay Competition Winner Presentation, FIRE Starters Global Summit: Dublin, February 24, 2023 Legal Prowess. Global Impact.