(USANYS)"
Summary
From: (USANYS)" To: ' " " " Subject: FW: U.S. v. Maxwell, Case No. 20 Cr. 330 (AN) [Joint Letter re. Redactions to Omnibus Resp. 8z. Ex. II] Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2021 17:17:38 +0000 Attachments: 2021.04.01 Joint Letter_re_redaetions_in Govt_Response.pdf: 2021.03.09 LAM— Letter to Nathan re re—dactions in Govt Res on df _ _ _ p sc.p _ _ _ _ lane-Images: image001.jpg Team, Judge Nathan also ordered the parties to docket the April 1 joint letter yesterday at the same time she ordered us to file the brief and exhibits by 3 pm. If we think this letter needs redactions, we have to propose redactions by April 19. I don't think the joint letter needs redactions but please let me know if you disagree. I would draw your attention to page 5 of the joint letter, in which Menninger wrote: Indeed, this Court rejected Ms. Maxwell's argument that certain portions of the Response and its exhibits should be unredacted because the material had already been made public. See Dkt. No. 1
Persons Referenced (2)
“...< Sent: Thursday, April 1, 20217:29 PM To: 'Nathan NYSD Chambers' < MI> Cc: Laura Menninger <M I>; Jeff Pagliuca Ma'; >; 'c >; (USANYS) ‹ > Subject: U.S. v. Maxwell,...”
Nicole Simmons“...no redactions are needed, I'll email them to let them know. Thanks, ■ From: Nicole Simmons < Sent: Thursday, April 1, 20217:29 PM To: 'Nathan NYSD Chambers' < MI> Cc:...”
Tags
Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureRelated Documents (6)
EFTA00021875
EFTA00032783
To: Jeff Pagliuca
From: " To: Jeff Pagliuca Cc: Sabina Mariella "Si McCawley Laura Mennin er Subject: RE: Documents Per Judge Nathan's Order Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 01:20:49 +0000 Attachments: Ex._B_2021.04.05_BSF_Reply_re_Maxwell_Rule_17(c)_Subpoena_- _Prpsd_Redact.._[Govemment_Proposed_Redactions].pdf; 2021.04.05 JEISF_Reply_re_Maxwell_Rule_17(c)_Subpoent[Govemment_Proposed_Reda ctions].pdf; 2021.04.19_LAM_Joint_Letter_with_BSF_re_redactiontin_Rule_17_pleadingsiGovemm ent_Proposed_Redactions].pdf; 2021.04.02_Defts_Resp_to_BSF_Ltr._Motn_to_Quash_Rule_17_SubiGovernment_Propos ed Redactions].pdf; Ex. A_2021.04.02_Defts_Resp_to_BSF_Ltr._Motn_to_Quash_Rule_17_Sub_- Prp;c1.._[Govemment_Proposed_Redactions].pdf Good evening, Our team has reviewed the documents and intends to propose a limited number of redactions to protect third party privacy interests. Attached please find pdfs with our proposed redactions in red boxes. Would you please let me know your respective positions regarding th
EFTA00025174
EFTA00024232
EFTA00016944
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.