Case 1:20-mc-00036-JEB-DAR Document 8 Filed 08/04/20 Page 14 of 18 procedures (e.g., MLAT) reflects its determination of the proper balance between the competing interests at issue in this litigation and thus constitutes the legislatively mandated processes by which foreign governments can seek to obtain content information from providers. Facebook could comply with a proper request pursuant to the CLOUD Act or the international assistance process.4 II. The Applicant has not satisfied the legal or prudential requirements for obtaining discovery under Section 1782. This Court also should deny the application because the requests are overbroad and disproportionate to the potential relevance and utility of any resulting information. In considering whether to grant a Section 1782 application, courts must weigh whether the discovery requested is “‘proportional’ considering ‘the issues at stake in the [foreign proceeding] … the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit.’” MetaLab Design Ltd. v. Zozi Int’l, Inc., 2018 WL 368766, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2018) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1)).5 Requests are overbroad “where they are not narrowly tailored.” Id. (quoting In re Ex Parte Application of Qualcomm, Inc., 162 F. Supp. 3d 1029, 1043 (N.D. Cal. 2016)). 4 Yet another legal framework for the disclosure of content information would be a formal request for discovery pursuant to the mutual legal assistance provisions codified in international treaties, such as the Palermo Convention on Transnational Organized Crime, International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, United Nations Convention Against Corruption, UN-CTOC and Convention Against Torture, to which The Gambia and the United States are both signatories. 5 “The proper scope of discovery arising out of a § 1782 application is generally determined by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,” In re: Ex Parte Application Varian Med. Sys. Int’l AG, 2016 WL 1161568, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2016), regardless of whether the foreign proceeding is civil or criminal, Medeiros v. Int’l Game Tech., 2016 WL 1611591, at *3 & n.2 (D. Nev. Apr. 22, 2016). 10