DOJ-OGR-00020410.jpg

Case 22-1426, Document 1-2, 07/08/2022, 3344417, Page24 of 91

03/09/2021 165 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, and Lara Pomerantz dated March 9, 2021 re: Opposition to Third Bail Motion Document filed by USA. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Pomerantz, Lara) (Entered: 03/09/2021)

03/15/2021 166 LETTER by Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Christian R. Everdell dated March 15, 2021 re: Pretrial Motion Replies (Everdell, Christian) (Entered: 03/15/2021)

03/16/2021 167 LETTER by Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Bobbi C. Sternheim dated 03/16/2021 re: Letter regarding Reply to Bail Motion (Sternheim, Bobbi) (Entered: 03/16/2021)

03/18/2021 168 ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell. On February 26, 2021, the Government filed its omnibus memorandum of law opposing Defendants' twelve pretrial motions. It filed the brief, along with the corresponding exhibits, under temporary seal pending the Court's resolution of its request to redact sensitive or confidential information. See Dkt. No. 162. On March 9, 2021, the Defendant objected to certain of the redactions that the Government had proposed, and she proposed additional redactions. Having considered the parties' respective positions, the Court will grant the Government's requests for redactions and sealing, as well as the Defendant's additional redaction requests, with the exceptions discussed below. Finally, the Court denies the Governments request to file Exhibit 11 entirely under seal. While portions of that transcript have been redacted, other portions are part of the public record. See Giuffre v. Maxwell, Case No. 15-cv-7433, Dkt. No. 1212-1. In light of this, the Court sees no basis to file the transcript entirely under seal rather than by redacting the relevant portions. In light of the above, the Government is hereby ORDERED to either docket on ECF their brief and the corresponding exhibits, consistent with this Order, or to file a letter with the Court justifying more tailored redaction and sealing requests regarding pages 1128 and 187188 and Exhibits 8 and 9 by no later than March 22, 2021. The parties are further ORDERED to meet, confer, and jointly propose redactions to the Defendant's cover letter objecting to the Government's proposed redactions by March 22, 2021. Finally, the parties are ORDERED to meet, confer, and propose redactions to Exhibit 11 of the Government's submission by March 22, 2021 (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 3/18/21)(jw) (Entered: 03/18/2021)

03/22/2021 169 ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell: Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell's third motion for release on bail, Dkt. No. 160, is DENIED. The parties are ORDERED to meet and confer and propose and justify any redactions to the Defendant's reply brief by March 24, 2021. If they conclude that redactions are unnecessary, the Defendant is ORDERED to docket the unredacted version of the brief by March 24, 2021. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 3/22/2021) (See ORDER set forth) (ap) Modified on 3/23/2021 (ap). (Entered: 03/22/2021)

03/22/2021 170 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated March 22, 2021 re: Redactions to Government Opposition to Defense Pretrial Motions Document filed by USA. (Pomerantz, Lara) (Entered: 03/22/2021)

03/23/2021 171 REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support as to Ghislaine Maxwell re: 160 THIRD MOTION for Bond. . (Sternheim, Bobbi) (Entered: 03/23/2021)

03/24/2021 172 ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell. On March 5, 2021, Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell submitted to the Court an application for an order authorizing a subpoena pursuant to Rule 17(c)(3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The proposed subpoena was directed at a law firm that represents alleged victims of the Defendant. As is standard for Rule 17(c) subpoenas, the application was made ex parte and under seal on the ground that it reveals defense strategy....[*** See this Order ***]... Rule 17(c)(3) provides that "[a]fter [an indictment] is filed, a subpoena requiring the production of personal or confidential information about a victim may be served on a third party only by court order," but "before entering the order and unless there are exceptional circumstances, the court must require giving notice to the victim so that the victim can move to quash or modify the subpoena or otherwise object." Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c)(3). Consistent with the Rule, on March 12, 2021, in a sealed ex parte Order, the Court required defense counsel to provide notice to alleged victims whose personal or confidential information may be disclosed by the proposed subpoena. The Court also gave the alleged victims an opportunity to object to or request modifications of the