returns, bank statements, investment records, and/or trust documents);
b. interest in any real property or any personal property valued at more than $ 5,000;
c. existence and assets of any trust (in which respondent or his relatives have a beneficiary interest or otherwise receive distributions) having assets of more than $ 5,000;
d. interest in any corporation, partnership, joint venture, closely-held corporation or other entity that has assets of more than $ 5,000;
e. any transfer or other disposition, from Jan. 1, 1988, to the present of certain listed assets.
The Court finds that each category of information sought is reasonably relevant to the issues of liability, the avoidance of asset transfers, or the attachment of assets. Because the Court finds that the subpoena requests information relevant to three of the four lawful purposes listed in its order of investigation, and thus is not sought solely for the purpose of assessing respondent's net worth, the Court need not determine whether the RTC has shown a reasonable suspicion of liability. See Walde, 18 F.3d at 948-49. The Court also rejects respondent's procedural objections to the subpoena. Accordingly, it hereby is
ORDERED, that the Amended Petition for Summary Enforcement is granted. It hereby further is
ORDERED, that Joseph A. Frates shall comply promptly with the administrative subpoena issued by the RTC on November 24, 1992, and served upon him in the RTC's investigation relating to State Federal.
Stanley S. Harris,
United States District Judge
Date: AUG 8 1994