Epstein Secrets

o Rajah v. Mukasey, the magistrate judge could also have cited authority from this Court which specifically adopted that case. In United States v. Garcia-Cordero, 595 F.Supp.2d 1312, 1318 (S.D.Fla. 2009), this Court quoted from and adopted Rajah’s conclusion that passports are not protected by the Fif

formation by conceding that he in fact has the documents.” In re Grand Jury Subpoena, Dated April 18, 2003, 383 F.3d 905, 910 (9th Cir. 2004). The D.C. Circuit has recently refused to extend the act of production doctrine on facts very similar to those here. In United States v. Ponds, 454 F.3d 313 (D.C. Ci

. Supp. 2d 100 (D.D.C. 2005) 14 EPA v. Mink, 410 U.S. 73 (1973) 17 Frontier Found. v. U.S Dept of Justice, 739 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2014) 17, 18 Garcia v. U.S. Dept of Justice, Office of Information and Privacy, 181 F. Supp. 2d 356 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) 15 Halpern v. F.B.I., 181 F.3d 279 (2d Cir. 1999)

f 25 reasonable explanations are closely tethered to the purpose of Exemption 5 and indeed are similar in kind and specificity to anticipated harms the D.C. Circuit has held support withholdings under Exemption 5. See Elec. Frontier Found., 739 F.3d at 6, 13. D. BOP Properly Withheld Information Pursuant to FO

. Supp. 2d 100 (D.D.C. 2005) 14 EPA v. Mink, 410 U.S. 73 (1973) 17 Frontier Found. v. U.S Dept of Justice, 739 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2014) 17, 18 Garcia v. U.S. Dept of Justice, Office of Information and Privacy, 181 F. Supp. 2d 356 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) 15 Halpern v. F.B.I., 181 F.3d 279 (2d Cir. 1999)

f 25 reasonable explanations are closely tethered to the purpose of Exemption 5 and indeed are similar in kind and specificity to anticipated harms the D.C. Circuit has held support withholdings under Exemption 5. See Elec. Frontier Found., 739 F.3d at 6, 13. D. BOP Properly Withheld Information Pursuant to FO

. Supp. 2d 100 (D.D.C. 2005) 14 EPA v. Mink, 410 U.S. 73 (1973) 17 Frontier Found. v. U.S Dept of Justice, 739 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2014) 17, 18 Garcia v. U.S. Dept of Justice, Office of Information and Privacy, 181 F. Supp. 2d 356 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) 15 Halpern v. F.B.I., 181 F.3d 279 (2d Cir. 1999)

f 25 reasonable explanations are closely tethered to the purpose of Exemption 5 and indeed are similar in kind and specificity to anticipated harms the D.C. Circuit has held support withholdings under Exemption 5. See Elec. Frontier Found., 739 F.3d at 6, 13. D. BOP Properly Withheld Information Pursuant to FO

ople, 986 P.2d 951, 959-60 (Colo. 1999) (court cannot enforce a plea 28 EFTA00299048 agreement that waives the mandatory parole period); State v. Garcia, 582 N.W. 2d 879, 881-82 (Minn. 1998) (plea agreement promised a sentence that did not contain the statutorily-required 10-year conditional release

ity is "at its most limited when reviewing the Executive's exercise of discretion over charging determinations." Id. In Fokker, the question before the D.C. Circuit was whether the district court had the power to decline to enter a speedy trial waiver because it believed that the terms of the DPA were too lenie