U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART I— CRIMES › Chapter CHAPTER 121— STORED WIRE AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSACTIONAL RECORDS ACCESS

18 U.S.C. § 2706

Cost reimbursement

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Payment.—Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c), a governmental entity obtaining the contents of communications, records, or other information under section 2702, 2703, or 2704 of this title shall pay to the person or entity assembling or providing such information a fee for reimbursement for such costs as are reasonably necessary and which have been directly incurred in searching for, assembling, reproducing, or otherwise providing such information. Such reimbursable costs shall include any costs due to necessary disruption of normal operations of any electronic communication service or remote computing service in which such information may be stored.(b)Amount.—The amount of the fee provided by subsection (a) shall be as mutually agreed by the governmental entity and the person or entity providing the information, or, in the absence of agreement, shall be as determined by the court which issued the order for production of such information (or the court before which a criminal prosecution relating to such information would be brought, if no court order was issued for production of the information).(c)Exception.—The requirement of subsection (a) of this section does not apply with respect to records or other information maintained by a communications common carrier that relate to telephone toll records and telephone listings obtained under section 2703 of this title. The court may, however, order a payment as described in subsection (a) if the court determines the information required is unusually voluminous in nature or otherwise caused an undue burden on the provider.(Added Pub. L. 99–508, title II, § 201[(a)], Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1866; amended Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, § 7061, Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4404.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1988—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 100–690 inserted heading.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective 90 days after Oct. 21, 1986, and, in the case of conduct pursuant to a court order or extension, applicable only with respect to court orders or extensions made after such effective date, see section 202 of Pub. L. 99–508, set out as a note under section 2701 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1988–2017 · leading case: The Matter of 381 Search Warrants Directed to Facebook Inc. v. New York County District Attorney's Office
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
The Matter of 381 Search Warrants Directed to Facebook Inc. v. New York County District Attorney's Office (2017) ny · cites it 3× “As the dissent 1 The SCA protects the rights of providers, not only by explicitly giving them the right to move to quash or modify if the material sought by the warrant is unusually voluminous or would present an undue burden, but also by allowing them to be reimbursed for the…”
Ameritech Corp. v. E. Michael McCann in His Official Capacity as District Attorney of Milwaukee County (2002) ca7 · cites it 3× “18 U.S.C. § 2706 (b). If, however, the parties cannot reach an agreement, the ECPA states that the court that issued the order for production shall determine the appropriate reimbursement calculation.”
Ameritech Corp. v. McCann (2004) wied · cites it 10× “Specifically, it sought a declaration that it is entitled to reimbursement for costs incurred in searching for assembling, reproducing and providing information subpoenaed by McCann’s office pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2706 . 1 On July 20, 2000, the Court issued a decision and order…”
Ameritech Corp. v. McCann (2001) wied · cites it 5× “In this lawsuit, Ameri-tech seeks a declaration that it is entitled to reimbursement, under 18 U.S.C. § 2706 (“Section 2706”), for the costs associated with providing such information.”
Microsoft Corp. v. United States Department of Justice (2017) wawd “18 U.S.C. § 2706 (b). “The combined effect of [Sections 2703] and 2705(b) is that the subscriber may never receive notice of a warrant to obtain content information from a remote computing service and the government may seek an order under § 2705(b) that restrains the provider…”
Ameritech Corporation, Cross-Appellee v. E. Michael McCann District Attorney of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin (2005) ca7 “Now making its second appearance in this court, this suit presents questions about the meaning and constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 2706 , part of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.”
Michigan Bell Telephone Co. v. Drug Enforcement Administration (1988) mied “” 18 U.S.C. § 2706 (b). An exception to this general rule is provided in subsection (c) for toll records and subscriber information: “[t]he requirement of subsection (a) of this section does not apply with respect to records or other information maintained by a communications…”
Ameritech Corp v. McCann, E. Michael (2002) ca7 · cites it 3× “18 U.S.C. § 2706 (b). If, however, the parties cannot reach an agreement, the ECPA states that the court that issued the order for production shall determine the appropriate reimbursement calculation.”
Requests for Information Under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2008) olc · cites it 3× “This conclusion is consistent with the Seventh Circuit’s decision in McCann, which interpreted 18 U.S.C. § 2706 (2000). Under section 2706, governmental entities, state or federal, must compensate providers for complying with certain requests or demands for information other…”
Ameritech Corp v. McCann, E. Michael (2005) ca7 “Now making its second appearance in this court, this suit presents questions about the meaning and constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. §2706 , part of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.