JOSEPH HOOD, District Judge
Having considered Petitioner's motion to clarify [Record No. 29], IT IS ORDERED:
(1) That said motion [Record No. 29] be, and the same hereby is GRANTED; AND
(2) That this Court's Order of February 26, 2003 [Record No. 26] be, and the same hereby is, SET ASIDE.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the motion by Petitioner for return of property pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 41(e) [Record No. 8]. Respondent has filed an objection [Record No. 15], to which Petitioner has filed a reply [Record No. 18]. This matter is now ripe for a decision.
Petitioner initiated this action by filing a petition to quash summons invoking jurisdiction pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7609 (h) [Record No. 1]. While the petition to quash was pending Petitioner filed this motion for return of property pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 41(e), seeking the return of business and tax records which it believed had been stolen from Petitioner by a former employee and given to the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") [Record No. 8]. Having considered the arguments of the parties, this Court determines that it will extend its equitable jurisdiction to consider Petitioner's motion for return of property. White Fabricating Co. v. United States, 903 F.2d 404, 407-8 (6th Cir. 1990)
Fed.R.Crim.P. 41(e) provides:
Motion for Return of Property. A person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure or by the deprivation of property may move the district court for the district in which the property was seized for the return of the property on the ground that such person is entitled to lawful possession of the property. The court shall receive evidence on any issue of fact necessary to the decision of the motion. If the motion is granted, the property shall be returned to the movant, although reasonable conditions may be imposed to protect access and use of the property in subsequent proceedings. If a motion for return of property is made or comes on for hearing in the district of trial after an indictment or information is filed, it shall be treated also as a motion to suppress under Rule 12.
Id. To the extent that the IRS is in possession of business and
tax records that were stolen from Petitioner, this Court sees no reason why Petitioner should not be allowed access to the records to copy them at Petitioner's expense.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) That Petitioner's motion [Record No. 8] be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED; and
(2) That Respondent must allow Petitioner access to the stolen records to copy them at Petitioner's expense.