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

emonstrate a "rational link" between the requested public disclosure and interference with ongoing or prospective investigations or proceedings. See Crooker v. Bureau of 4 Through counsel, plaintiff has also agreed not to challenge the application of Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F) to such information in records withhel

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

emonstrate a "rational link" between the requested public disclosure and interference with ongoing or prospective investigations or proceedings. See Crooker v. Bureau of 4 Through counsel, plaintiff has also agreed not to challenge the application of Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F) to such information in records withhel

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

emonstrate a "rational link" between the requested public disclosure and interference with ongoing or prospective investigations or proceedings. See Crooker v. Bureau of Through counsel, plaintiff has also agreed not to challenge the application of Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F) to such information in records withheld