"It must be noted, however, that the scope of the confidentiality requirements, whether they are based on precepts of legal ethics, the attorney-client privilege, or the work-product doctrine, can vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. It is recommended that clients question attorneys in their respective jurisdictions as to the scope of the confidentiality obligation".

I am no lawyer. but the requirements in Ca. and EDOT may be different. I would not imagine J.W over turning a decision and appeal in California. But, I would think this is something the defences would hope for. Other than that, I think the Higgins motion can be put to rest. It seems Iron Clad to me. Of course, the details are sealed so we don't really know what is going on. But, this is more fun than talking about an ignor feature. LOL.JMHO