In FTC v. Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 3:14mc5 (E.D. Va. Mar. 10, 2015), Reckitt, the recipient of a Civil Investigative Demand from the FTC, withheld on privilege grounds 28,000 documents falling into the following categories: (1) drafts of documents published or intended to be published; (2) attorney notes or edits relating to those drafts; (3) emails related to or accompanying the drafts; and (4) attorney advice provided based on the drafts, such as in emails and memoranda.  The FTC sought an order compelling disclosure of these documents on the ground that “the Fourth Circuit has long held that the attorney-client privilege does not apply to communications in connection with a proposed public disclosure.”  Reckitt argued that privilege is inapplicable only where an attorney acts as a mere conduit of information to be made public, and that communications, including drafts, underlying the published documents are privileged because they constitute legal advice.  The court held that the Fourth Circuit applies narrow protection for materials relating to documents that a client intends to make public, “the Fourth Circuit has held that the attorney-client privilege does not extend to the published data and the details underlying it.  That, of course, could include any of the documents that Reckitt has labeled ‘legal advice’, if the ‘legal advice’ qualifies as a detail underlying the published data.”  Thecourt ordered Reckitt to apply its guidance to the documents currently withheld, and appointed a special master to review any documents Reckitt continued to argue were privileged.