United States of America, McKesson Corporation, Intervenor-Appellant v. Albert J. Bergonzi, and Jay M. Lapine Charles W. McCall

Intervenor-appellant McKesson Corporation (“McKesson”) brings this interlocutory appeal of a discovery disclosure order in a criminal case. The district court ordered the government to produce to defendants McCall and Lapine materials McKesson had provided to the government under a confidentiality agreement that acknowledged the government’s right to use the materials in any criminal proceedings. McKesson argued, however, that as to others the materials should remain protected by the attorney client privilege and work product doctrine. The district court disagreed, and ordered disclosure to the defendants in accordance with Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). See United States v. Bergonzi et al., 216 F.R.D. 487, 494 (N.D.Cal.2003). We dismiss McKes-son’s appeal of the district court’s order as moot.

McKesson now concedes that the defendants are entitled to use the materials in their defense, and thus no longer challenges the district court’s Brady and Rule 16 rulings. Because McKesson does not seek reversal of the disclosure order as to these defendants, there is no other re lief we can…