DOJ-OGR-00000152.tif

89a
motions in limine to be considered at the final pretrial
conference. The Government's proposal will give
Maxwell an opportunity to challenge admission of that
evidence and to bring to the Court's attention any
issues that require resolution before trial. "This is all
that Rule 404(b) requires." United States v. Thompson,
No. 13-cr-378 (AJN), 2013 WL 6246489, at *9 (S.D.N.Y.
Dec. 3, 2013). The Court concludes this schedule is
generally reasonable, although additional time to
enable briefing and resolution in advance of trial is
strongly encouraged.
The Court's denial of Maxwell's requests to compel
pretrial disclosures does not preclude the parties from
negotiating in good faith for an expedited discovery
timeline that will account for Maxwell's specific
concerns. "[I]n most criminal cases, pretrial disclosure
will redound to the benefit of all parties, counsel, and
the court." United States v. Percevault, 490 F.2d 126,
132 (2d Cir. 1974). In general, the Court will require
the parties to negotiate a final, omnibus schedule to
propose to the Court. The Court concludes that the
disclosure of all of the above materials approximately
six to eight weeks in advance of trial is appropriate
and sufficient.
Given the complexities of the case and the addition
of two counts via the S2 indictment, the Court
encourages the parties to agree to approximately eight
weeks.
IX. The S2 superseding indictment moots Maxwell's
grand jury challenge
The Court has not received supplemental briefing on
the motions in light of the return of the S2 superseding
DOJ-OGR-00000152