In Re: APPLICATION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1782 TO TAKE DISCOVERY FROM BROOKFIELD INFRASTRUCTURE PARTNERS L.P., BROOKFIELD ASSET MANAGEMENT LTD., BROOKFIELD CORPORATION, CAHILL GORDON & REINDEL LLP, KPMG LLP, THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA, SCOTIA CAPITAL (USA)

Filing 12

ORDER granting 1 Motion for Discovery. It is therefore ORDERED that: 1. The Application is GRANTED; 2.The Applicant is authorized to take discovery relating to the issues identified in its application from the Discovery Subjects in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rules of this Court, including by serving on the Discovery Subjects a subpoena duces tecum for a deposition and the production of the documents listed in the form subpoenas attached as Exhibits AL to the Declaration of Scott Curtis Nielson; 3.The Discovery Subjects are hereby directed to comply with the subpoenas in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rules of this Court, to produce all responsive documents and mak e witnesses available for deposition within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order; and 4.This Court shall retain such jurisdiction as is necessary to effectuate the terms of such subpoenas. 5.The grant of the Application is without prejudic e to a challenge to the subpoenas, including their scope, and potential reconsideration of the application of the § 1782 factors. See Gushlak v. Gushlak, 486 F. App'x 215, 217 (2d Cir. 2012) (summary order). IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Lewis J. Liman on 11/22/2024) (ks)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN RE :
APPLICATION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1782 TO
TAKE DISCOVERY FROM BROOKFIELD
INFRASTRUCTURE PARTNERS L.P.,
BROOKFIELD ASSET MANAGEMENT
LTD., BROOKFIELD CORPORATION,
CAHILL GORDON & REINDEL LLP, KPMG
LLP, THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA,
SCOTIA CAPITAL (USA) INC., SCOTIA
HOLDINGS (USA) LLC, ARUP LATIN
AMERICA S.A., ARUP AMERICAS, INC.,
CITIBANK, N.A., WELLS FARGO, N.A.,
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., THE CLEARING
HOUSE PAYMENTS COMPANY L.L.C.,
AND THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF
NEW YORK

Case No. 1:24-mc-00533

ORDER
Upon consideration of the application for an order under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 (the
“Application”) to take discovery from Brookfield Infrastructure Partners L.P., Brookfield Asset
Management Ltd., Brookfield Corporation, Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, KPMG LLP, The
Bank of Nova Scotia, Scotia Capital (USA) Inc., Scotia Holdings (USA) LLC, Arup Latin
America S.A., Arup Americas, Inc., Citibank, N.A., Wells Fargo, N.A., JPMorgan Chase & Co.,
The Clearing House Payments Company L.L.C., and The Federal Reserve Bank Of New York
(together, the “Discovery Subjects”) submitted by the Metropolitan Municipality of Lima
(“MML”)—and all papers submitted in support, including the Declaration of Richard Allemant
and the Declaration of Scott Curtis Nielson, this Court finds that (1) the statutory requirements
of 28 U.S.C. § 1782 are satisfied, and (2) the factors identified by the United States Supreme

1

Court in Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241 (2004) weigh in favor of
granting the application.
It is therefore ORDERED that:
1.

The Application is GRANTED;

2.

The Applicant is authorized to take discovery relating to the issues identified in its
application from the Discovery Subjects in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure and the Rules of this Court, including by serving on the Discovery Subjects a
subpoena duces tecum for a deposition and the production of the documents listed in the
form subpoenas attached as Exhibits A–L to the Declaration of Scott Curtis Nielson;

3.

The Discovery Subjects are hereby directed to comply with the subpoenas in accordance
with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rules of this Court, to produce all
responsive documents and make witnesses available for deposition within thirty (30) days
from the date of this Order; and

4.

This Court shall retain such jurisdiction as is necessary to effectuate the terms of such
subpoenas.

5.

The grant of the Application is without prejudice to a challenge to the subpoenas,
including their scope, and potential reconsideration of the application of the § 1782
factors. See Gushlak v. Gushlak, 486 F. App’x 215, 217 (2d Cir. 2012) (summary order).

IT IS SO ORDERED
New

York,

New

York

Dated: __November 22, 2024

2