Case File
efta-efta00027052DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceEFTA00027052
Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 8
Reference
efta-efta00027052
Pages
0
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available
Loading PDF viewer...
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureText extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: "
To: "
Cc: "
,
Subject: RE: US v. Epstein
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 20:13:00 +0000
Inline-Images: image001.jpg; image002.jpg
Yes, please exclude the "Junk Search Terms (From)" hits from the responsiveness search. Once the search for the
responsiveness terms are run, please save the search so that we can take a look. I do not expect we will ask to batch
these out.
Thanks,
From:
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 3:55 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: US v. Epstein
I am assuming that when we run the responsiveness terms and e-mail addresses we are excluding the junk documents
correct? Also, once the search for the responsiveness terms are run what do you want to do with the documents? Will
you be conducting a review and will I need to batch these documents out for you?
From:
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 3:41 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: US v. Epstein
Thanks =.
I think we'd like to scrap this second search entirely. So please only keep the first search entitled "Epstein —
Junk Search Terms (From)" and tag those hits as junk. Please run the responsiveness search terms on all of the remaining
documents.
From:
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 3:11 PM
To:
Cc:
>;
Subject: RE: US v. Epstein
The searches were run on the e-mails and the attachments. Do you not want the searches run on the full families?
EFTA00027052
From:
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 3:06 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: US v. Epstein
I've reviewed the searched in US v. Epstein (SW). The search entitled "Epstein — Junk Search Terms (From)" looks
good to me. Please tag all of those as junk.
The search entitled "Epstein — Junk Search Terms (Keywords)" seems to have caught up a number of documents that are
not junk and appear responsive to the warrant. It's not clear to me why that happened—the ones I'm seeing don't
appear to have any of the keywords on the attached list. Is there a reason that would be? Also, I realized that this search
caught up a number of non-email documents. Would it be possible to run this search only on emails files, please?
Thanks,
From:
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 2:12 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: US v. Epstein
Thanks very much, =I.
The searches in the US v. Epstein database look good to me. Those materials are ready stamp as set out in my prior email.
I'll review the searches in US v. Epstein (SW) now.
From:
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 12:19 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: US v. Epstein
Hello,
Can you please review the following searches
US v. Epstein database:
Q 01.Produc As Confidintial
Q 01 Produce As Highly Confidential
- Q 01.Produce As Is
EFTA00027053
US v. Epstein (SW)
Q Epstein - Junk Search Terms (From)
Q Epstein - Junk Search Terms (Keywords)
Please let me know if there are any questions.
Thank you.
EFTA00027054
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.