Summary
Summary being generated…
Document not found.
Document not found.
Summary being generated…
法庭文件 · 2026-03-17 · 3 页 · United States District Court · S.D.N.Y.
The government asks the court to quash Mr. Guo’s Rule 17(c) subpoena, arguing it is overly broad, irrelevant, and would improperly delay sentencing.
This three-page letter motion, dated March 17, 2026 from the Assistant U.S. Attorneys assigned to the case, asks Judge Analisa Torres to quash Mr. Guo's Rule 17(c) subpoena directed at his purported former attorney in United States v. Miles Guo, S3 23 Cr. 118 (AT).
The motion rests on two principal grounds:
Under United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974), Rule 17(c) document subpoenas may only seek records that are relevant, admissible, and specific. The government argues that the subpoena fails on each prong:
The government argues that resolving the subpoena would further delay the long-deferred sentencing, citing the Court's prior order at Dkt. 805 (denying another of Guo's motions for sentencing discovery) where the Court emphasized that granting the motion "would further delay resolution of the case."
The motion asks that, in any event, the subpoena dispute not be permitted to delay the then-scheduled April 27, 2026 sentencing — referencing the Court's earlier order at Dkt. 814 directing the government to file this response and noting that the response is being filed in the same order that scheduled the April 27 sentencing date.
The motion walks through:
The Court denies the motion to quash and grants Mr. Guo's subpoena (with scope limits) at case-doc-823, finding the government lacked a legitimate interest of its own in subpoena materials directed at a third-party former attorney.