Attorneys for the U.S. Olympic Committee, former USA Gymnastics chief executive Steve Penny and a law firm hired by the USOC to conduct an investigation of the Larry Nassar sex abuse scandal have asked a U.S. District Court judge to deny a subpoena on behalf of Olympic champion Aly Raisman seeking documents related to the investigation, according to court filings.

Raisman’s attorneys filed a subpoena on Sept. 26 requesting that Ropes & Gray, the law firm conducting the Nassar investigation for the USOC, turn all over all documents the firm has received from USA Gymnastics and the USOC related to Nassar, all correspondence between the firm and the USOC and USA Gymnastics, all reports related to the investigation and all witness statements “in your possession, custody or control regarding” the Ropes & Gray investigation of Nassar.

Raisman, who was sexually abused by Nassar, is suing the USOC and USA Gymnastics in U.S. District Court in San Jose. The suit is scheduled to go to trial in February.

Mitchell Kamin, an attorney representing the USOC, wrote in a Nov. 12 letter to Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi that the motion by Raisman’s attorneys would “impair” the Ropes & Gray investigation of Nassar. The two sides also disagree on whether there is a stay in the case on discovery beyond the court jurisdiction over the case.

The USOC hired Ropes & Gray earlier this year to conduct an investigation into “not only ‘who knew what when’ and what was done in response” to Nassar’s decades-long abuse of young athletes,” but also the circumstances that contributed to and allowed for Nassar’s abuse to continue for such an extended period of time,” according to the law firm.

Ropes & Gray said the firm is not providing legal advice or acting as attorneys for any individual or organization, has full discretion to conduct the investigation and make factual findings and decide what is included in their report and that there is no attorney-client privilege that is attached to the investigation’s findings.

Ropes & Gray said in a Nov. 7 court filing that the report will “be delivered to the public in a matter of weeks.”

Ropes & Gray is arguing that the Raisman motion is “unduly burdensome” and that its “core work product” is privileged.

Related Articles Adam Schmidt reaches settlement with ice rink in Richard Callaghan sex abuse case

NCAA tells State Supreme Court the USOPC has no legal duty to protect athletes from sex abuse

Gymnasts, parents recount abuse by coaches at Azarian Gymnastics

Special Report: Maggie Haney still working with gymnasts despite suspension

2028 Olympic logos released for games in Los Angeles “During the course of the Independent Investigation, Ropes has interviewed numerous witnesses, including survivors of sexual abuse,” Ropes attorneys Eric Hubbard wrote in the Nov. 7 filing. “These witness interviews were neither recorded nor stenographically transcribed. Rather, notes were taken by a Ropes lawyer who necessarily exercised judgment in taking the notes and synthesizing the information for use in connection with the finding of facts, and the preparation of the investigative report for release to the public. Any interview memoranda therefore include and reflect attorney mental impressions (in terms of topics covered and questions posed, together with the context of other witness information and associated documents determined to be relevant). Moreover, the very selection of certain witnesses, and the order in which they were interviewed would disclose counsel’s judgment on how to conduct the Independent Investigation.

“Ropes is working expeditiously to complete the Independent Investigation’s report. Any benefit of Ropes’ fact-finding to which Plaintiff is entitled will be provided by the public report. Rule 26(b )(2)(C)(i) restricts Plaintiffs discovery of drafts of the Independent Investigation report, which reflect the very core of Ropes attorneys’ mental impressions. While it is correct that Ropes, as the independent investigator, does not have a client relationship with the USOC, these mental impressions and core work product are privileged and deserve protection from discovery.”

Vince W. Finaldi, an attorney for Raisman, wrote to DeMarchi that “the requests are not burdensome nor ‘untimely.’ Ropes & Gray simply just does not want to comply, which is no ground upon it can refuse to do so.”

Finaldi also wrote the witness statements and reports generated by the Ropes & Gray are not protected work product and that other materials requested are not privileged.

“Ropes & Gray denies any role as counsel for USOC or USAG and has publicly stated that it is an independent investigator,” Finaldi wrote. “Further, there is no attorney-client privilege, nor ‘anticipated litigation’ as they claim; litigation has commenced and their investigation, admittedly, has nothing to do with litigation… Ropes & Gray is not conducting an ‘investigation’ that has anything to do with litigation, anticipated litigation, or representation of clients.”