Epstein Secrets

gically and plausibly explains the relationship between the documents and those pending criminal cases. Plaintiff also relies on a decision by Judge Torres in Noel, but this decision and subsequent proceedings in that case cut against plaintiff's position. The Government has already disclosed to the No

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) 15 Hopkins v. HUD, 929 F.2d 81 (2d Cir. 1991) 12 Human Rights Watch v. BOP, No. 13-CV-7360 (JP0), 2015 WL 5459713 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015) 7, 21 EFTA0007

ey had not done so. (The focus of those prosecutions is on the false certifications they are alleged to have signed.) A June 9, 2020 order by Judge Torres, denying Thomas's motion to compel "disclosure of `reports generated by 7 The Government's vague allegations of the impact of disclosure on juror te

cting the agency's deliberative process is not protected."); Local 3, Intl Bhd. of Elec. Workers v. NLRB, 845 F.2d 1177, 1180 (2d Cir. 1988) (same); Hopkins v. U.S. Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., 929 F.2d 81, 85 (2d Cir. 1991) (same). Accordingly, all factual 19 EFTA00071648 Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Docu

gically and plausibly explains the relationship between the documents and those pending criminal cases. Plaintiff also relies on a decision by Judge Torres in Noel, but this decision and subsequent proceedings in that case cut against plaintiff's position. The Government has already disclosed to the No

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) 15 Hopkins v. HUD, 929 F.2d 81 (2d Cir. 1991) 12 Human Rights Watch v. BOP, No. 13-CV-7360 (JP0), 2015 WL 5459713 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015) 7, 21 EFTA0008

ey had not done so. (The focus of those prosecutions is on the false certifications they are alleged to have signed.) A June 9, 2020 order by Judge Torres, denying Thomas's motion to compel "disclosure of `reports generated by 7 The Government's vague allegations of the impact of disclosure on juror te

cting the agency's deliberative process is not protected."); Local 3, Intl Bhd. of Elec. Workers v. NLRB, 845 F.2d 1177, 1180 (2d Cir. 1988) (same); Hopkins v. U.S. Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., 929 F.2d 81, 85 (2d Cir. 1991) (same). Accordingly, all factual 19 EFTA00088725 Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Docu

gically and plausibly explains the relationship between the documents and those pending criminal cases. Plaintiff also relies on a decision by Judge Torres in Noel, but this decision and subsequent proceedings in that case cut against plaintiff's position. The Government has already disclosed to the No

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) 15 Hopkins v. HUD, 929 F.2d 81 (2d Cir. 1991) 12 Human Rights Watch v. BOP, No. 13-CV-7360 (JP0), 2015 WL 5459713 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015) 7, 21 EFTA0009