Epstein Secrets

pply not only to references to unindicted co-conspirators in indictments and factual proffers, but also to motion papers. See, e.g., United States I Anderson , 55 F. Supp. 2d 1163, 1168 (D. Kan. 1999) ("After carefully reviewing the government's moving papers on the conflict of interest issue, the court

fully requests that the Court allow it to redact the personal telephone number and email address of its personnel, that appears on eighteen pages in Exhibit A to DE48. The information serves no evidentiary purpose. The United States has conferred with counsel for Petitioners on these matters. Petitioners have no

ply not only to references to unindicted co-conspirators in indictments and factual proffers, but also to motion papers. See, e.g., United States v. Anderson , 55 F. Supp. 2d 1163, 1168 (D. Kan. 1999) ("After carefully reviewing the government's moving papers on the conflict of interest issue, the court

fully requests that the Court allow it to redact the personal telephone number and email address of its personnel, that appears on eighteen pages in Exhibit A to DE48. The information serves no evidentiary purpose. The United States has conferred with counsel for Petitioners on these matters. Petitioners have no

pply not only to references to unindicted co-conspirators in indictments and factual proffers, but also to motion papers. See, e.g., United States I Anderson , 55 F. Supp. 2d 1163, 1168 (D. Kan. 1999) ("After carefully reviewing the government's moving papers on the conflict of interest issue, the court

fully requests that the Court allow it to redact the personal telephone number and email address of its personnel, that appears on eighteen pages in Exhibit A to DE48. The information serves no evidentiary purpose. The United States has conferred with counsel for Petitioners on these matters, CONCLUSI