In In re Republic of Ecuador, 735 F.3d 1179 (10th Cir. 2013) (No. 12-1402), the Tenth Circuit held that the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 relating to discovery of expert witness materials do not allow a party to withhold broad categories of documents provided to a testifying expert by the party’s attorneys.  Instead, the amended Rule limits discovery of two categories of information: expert draft reports and communications between the expert and a party’s attorney to the extent that the communications do not provide facts that the expert is to consider in forming an opinion.  In this matter, the Republic of Ecuador sought discovery from Chevron’s testifying expert witness, Bjorkman, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1782(a), which allows discovery in the United States for use in foreign proceedings.  Bjorkman had provided testimony on Chevron’s behalf in a proceeding in Ecuador.  Chevron withheld from production thousands of documents that its attorneys had created during the litigation in Ecuador, which they had provided to Bjorkman.  Chevron argued that the 2010 amendments to Rule 26 created a “sea change” in discovery of expert witness materials, and had the effect of walling off discovery of work product created by a party’s attorneys that is provided to an expert.  The magistrate judge and the district court rejected Chevron’s sweeping view of amended Rule 26, and the federal appellate court affirmed.  The 2010 amendments changed Rule 26 in two ways: (1) draft expert reports are now protected work product, and (2) communications between testifying experts and a party’s attorneys are protected work product.  Rule 26 still requires, however, a party to disclose all “facts or data” “considered” by an expert witness, including work product provided to the expert by counsel, and ‘facts or data’ are to be interpreted broadly to require disclosure of any material considered by the expert, even if provided by counsel.