Securities and Exchange Commission v. BIC Real Estate Development Corporation et al

Filing 66

ORDER AFTER INFORMAL CONFERENCE re: Imaging the Personal Computers of Daniel Nase and Margaria Nase, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 5/16/2016. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,

12
13
14
15
16

Plaintiff,
v.
BIC REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:16-CV-00344 LJO JLT
ORDER AFTER INFORMAL CONFERENCE RE:
IMAGING THE PERSONAL COMPUTERS OF
DANIEL NASE AND MARGARITA NASE

17
18

On May 16, 2016, the Court held an informal telephonic conference related to an issue raised at

19

the scheduling conference. (Doc. 63) At issue was the SEC’s request to have the personal laptops of

20

Daniel Nase and Margarita Nase imaged. The SEC did not seek to obtain any information taken from

21

the images or to view the images but, rather, to have the images maintained to ensure the information

22

contained on the computers were preserved. The SEC founded its concern on a showing that Mr. Nase

23

altered or falsified a document produced in response to the investigation.

24

In advance of the conference, the SEC submitted a brief written outline of the situation and Mr.

25

and Ms. Nase responded. In particular, the Nases expressed concern that the personal computers

26

contained information that may be private, confidential or privileged or as to which the SEC has no

27

entitlement to access. The Nases expressed that Mr. Nase primarily used computers of BIC to conduct

28

the business of that organization and represented that Ms. Nase never used her personal computer for

1

1

the entity’s operations.
Given this representation1, during the telephone conference the SEC modified its request that

2
3

only Mr. Nase’s personal computer be imaged. Moreover, given that there is no request at this time that

4

anyone be permitted to view the image from Mr. Nase’s computer, the Court does not find that there

5

are any significant privacy issues at play. Therefore, the Court ORDERS:
1.

6

The receiver, David Stapelton, or his designee SHALL be allowed to image the

7

personal laptop computer belonging to Daniel Nase no later than May 20, 2016. The receiver SHALL

8

make all efforts to image the computer on site but, if this cannot be accomplished, he will ensure the

9

computer is returned to Mr. Nase within 24 hours.
2.

10
11

The receiver SHALL maintain the image in his custody and prevent anyone from

viewing until authorized by the Court.

12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14

Dated:

May 16, 2016

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The Court urges Ms. Nase’s attorney to confirm with her that she has not used her personal laptop for BIC business of any
kind. If it turns out that she has used it for BIC business, this order will apply equally to her computer as well. On the other
hand, if it later turns out that she used her personal computer for BIC business, the Court will entertain a request for
sanctions of the most severe kind.

2