Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership v. Qin

Background

The petitioners moved for an order requiring Hui Qin to comply with earlier discovery orders and for a renewed contempt finding. The opinion states that Qin had violated each of the court’s discovery orders beginning with the November 1, 2022 order, including orders issued after the petitioners’ February 14 and June 21, 2023 motions to compel. The petitioners also presented evidence that Qin’s noncompliance was willful and that he had destroyed or failed to preserve evidence.

At an August 17, 2023 hearing, Qin surrendered his mobile phones to the petitioners’ forensic specialist, Tino Kyprianou, for imaging. The court had ordered Qin to provide all passwords needed to collect data from the phones, including iCloud passwords. The opinion states that Qin did not provide the requested passwords and that he repeatedly objected to requests for them, while stating that he did not know the passwords.

Contempt Finding

The court applied the standard for civil contempt, which requires a clear and unambiguous order, clear and convincing proof of noncompliance, and a failure to make a diligent effort to comply reasonably. The court accepted the petitioners’ account of the events after the August 17 hearing and found that all three requirements were met. It found that the password directive was clear, that the parties agreed Qin had not provided the requested passwords, and that Qin had made only minimal efforts to comply.

Sanction and Other Orders

The court found Qin in civil contempt of the August 17, 2023 order. It ordered that he would be arrested and confined if he did not provide working passwords for all requested accounts to Kyprianou by August 28, 2023. The opinion identifies, at a minimum, passwords for the accounts sinuosiminghan@gmail.com and qinhui198@icloud.com. Qin could provide passwords found in his files or obtained from acquaintances, or reset the passwords and provide the new ones.

The court stated that Qin could end or avoid confinement by complying. If he did not fully comply by August 28, he was ordered to surrender to the U.S. Marshals Service before 2:00 p.m. at the specified detention facility. If he did not surrender, the Marshals Service was authorized to use reasonable force necessary to apprehend him, including forcible entry into a residence or domicile believed to be associated with him.

The court also ordered that data gathered from Qin’s phones could not be searched or accessed by the petitioners until an appropriate search process was established to limit production to relevant, non-privileged information. The parties were ordered to jointly file a stipulation concerning electronically stored information by September 1, 2023. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 220.