Case 2:16-mj-01061-TJR Document 13 Filed 02/03/17 Page 16 of 29 A. Application of the Morrison Analysis As an initial matter, the court notes that the parties do not dispute the Second Circuit's conclusion at the first step of the Morrison framework - that Congress did not intend the SCA's warrant provisions to apply extraterritorially. Rather, the Government takes issue with the second step of the Morrison analysis as applied by the Second Circuit in Microsoft. The Government argues that the Second Circuit erred when it determined that the "focus" of section 2703 of the SCA is privacy, as opposed to disclosure. 10 However, the court will assume, arguendo, that the focus of the SCA's warrant provisions is privacy as the Second Circuit reasoned. With this "focus" in mind, a reviewing court must determine whether the case involves a domestic application of the SCA. See RJR Nabisco, 136 S. Ct. at 2101. To do so, the court must examine where the conduct relevant to the statute's focus occurred. See id. ("If the conduct relevant to the statute's focus occurred in the United States, then the case involves a permissible domestic application even if other conduct occurred abroad; but if the conduct relevant to the focus occurred in a foreign country, then the case involves an impermissible extraterritorial application regardless of any other conduct that occurred in U.S. territory."). 1. Analysis of Extraterritoriality in Microsoft With respect to this portion of the Morrison framework, the Microsoft court examined where the electronic data was "seized" and the "invasion of the customer's privacy 10 Relying on Morrison and RJR Nabisco, the Government contends that step two of a proper extraterritoriality analysis should proceed on a section by section basis. See Gov't Reply at 13-16. According to the Government, the Second Circuit incorrectly concluded that privacy concerns trump the actual focus of§ 2703, which is disclosure. 16