Republic of Ecuador, The et al v. Stratus Consulting, Inc.

Filing 29

ORDER granting 26 Chevron Corporation's Unopposed Motion for Leave to Intervene in the 28 U.S.C. § 1782 Action Initiated by the Republic of Ecuador And Dr. Diego Garca Carrin. Chevron Corporation's Complaint in Intervention Accompan ying its Unopposed Motion for Leave to Intervene in the 28 U.S.C. § 1782 Action Initiated by the Republic of Ecuador and Dr. Diego Garca Carrin [#26-1] SHALL BE FILED under a separate docket number as Chevron Corporation's pleading which sets out its claim or defense as an intervenor respondent. The caption of this case SHALL BE AMENDED to show Chevron Corporation as an intervenor respondent. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 6/10/2013. (klyon, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-01112-REB-KLM
In re Application of:
The REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR and
DR. DIEGO GARCÍA CARRIÓN, the Attorney
General Of The Republic of Ecuador,
Applicants,
v.
For the Issuance of a Subpoena Under 28
U.S.C. § 1782(a) for the Taking of a
Deposition of and the Production of
Documents by
STRATUS CONSULTING, INC.,
DOUGLAS BELTMAN,
ANN S. MAEST,
DAVID J. CHAPMAN,
JENNIFER M.H. PEERS, and
DAVID M. MILLS,
for Use in a Foreign Proceeding,
Respondents, and
CHEVRON CORPORATION,
Intervenor Respondent.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO INTERVENE
Blackburn, J.
This matter is before me on Chevron Corporation’s Unopposed Motion for
Leave to Intervene in the 28 U.S.C. § 1782 Action Initiated by the Republic of

Ecuador And Dr. Diego García Carrión [#26]1 filed June 7, 2013. The motion is
unopposed. I grant the motion.
The proposed subpoenas at issue in this case concern evidence the applicants
seek to use in a foreign proceeding, Chevron Corporation and Texaco Petroleum
Corporation v. The Republic of Ecuador, PCA Case No. 2009-23, a Bilateral
Investment Treaty arbitration under the rules of the U.N. Commission on International
Trade Law. Amended Application, p. 2. The treaty arbitration concerns, inter alia,
Chevron’s claim that it did not receive due process, under international law, in
environmental litigation in Lago Agrio, Ecuador. The subpoenas seek production of
documents and testimony related to, among other topics, an agreement between
Chevron and Stratus Consulting, Inc., a respondent in the above-captioned case. The
agreement between Chevron and Stratus documents the settlement of claims and
cross-claims asserted in Chevron Corp. v. Donziger et al., No. 11-cv-00691-LAK-JCF
(S.D.N.Y.), litigation related to the other litigation cited above. Douglas Beltman and
Ann Maest, also respondents in this case, submitted statements explaining their role in
the Lago Agrio litigation and the alleged efforts of the plaintiffs in that case to secure an
unjust and corrupt judgment in the Lago Agrio Litigation.
Chevron argues that it has a distinct interest related to the discovery sought by
the applicants in the above-captioned case and notes that it is a party to the foreign
proceeding that forms the basis for the Application, Chevron Corporation and Texaco

1

“[#26]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a
specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this
convention throughout this order.

2

Petroleum Corporation v. The Republic of Ecuador, cited above. According to
Chevron, no party to the present proceeding adequately can adequately represent
Chevron’s interests in this proceeding. As required by FED. R. CIV. P. 24(c), Chevron
has attached to its motion a proposed complaint in intervention.
“On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who . . . claims an
interest relating to the . . . transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated
that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant’s
ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.”
FED. R. CIV. P. 24(a)(2). Here, Chevron claims and has demonstrated a significant
interest in the transaction that is the subject of this action, that disposition of this action
may impair or impede Chevron’s ability to protect its interest, and that the existing
parties are not in a position adequately to represent Chevron’s interest. On this basis,
the motion to intervene is granted.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That Chevron Corporation’s Unopposed Motion for Leave to Intervene in
the 28 U.S.C. § 1782 Action Initiated by the Republic of Ecuador And Dr. Diego
García Carrión [#26] filed June 7, 2013, is GRANTED;
2. That under FED. R. CIV. P. 24(a), Chevron Corporation SHALL BE
PERMITTED to intervene as a respondent in this case;
3. That Chevron Corporation’s Complaint in Intervention Accompanying its
Unopposed Motion for Leave to Intervene in the 28 U.S.C. § 1782 Action Initiated
by the Republic of Ecuador and Dr. Diego García Carrión [#26-1] SHALL BE FILED

3

under a separate docket number as Chevron’s Corporation’s pleading which sets out its
claim or defense as an intervenor respondent; and
4. That the caption of this case SHALL BE AMENDED to show Chevron
Corporation as an intervenor respondent.
Dated June 10, 2013, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

4