Epstein Secrets

U.S. 168, 184 (1975)). A document is "predecisional" when it is "prepared in order to assist an agency decisionmaker in arriving at his decision." Grumman, 421 U.S. at 184. While a document is predecisional if it "precedes, in temporal sequence, the `decision' to which it relates," Grand Cent. P 'ship

poses 3 Exemption 7(A) also protects records that, if released, could interfere with post-trial criminal proceedings, such as an appeal. See, e.g., Kidder v. FBI, 517 F. Supp. 2d 17, 27-28 (D. D.C. 2007); Kansi v. U.S Dep't ofJustice, II F. Supp. 2d 42, 44 (D. D.C. 1998). 8 EFTA00069319 As a thresh

U.S. 168, 184 (1975)). A document is "predecisional" when it is "prepared in order to assist an agency decisionmaker in arriving at his decision." Grumman, 421 U.S. at 184. While a document is predecisional if it "precedes, in temporal sequence, the 'decision' to which it relates," Grand Cent. P'ship,

2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20, 21 Kansi v. U.S. Depst of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42 (D.D.C. 1998) 8 Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23 (D.D.C. 199 7) 7 Kidder v. FBI, 517 F. Supp. 2d 17 (D.D.C. 200 7) 8 Leopold v. Office ofDirector of National Intelligence, No. 16-2517 (CKK), 2020 WL 805380 (D.D.C. Feb.

U.S. 168, 184 (1975)). A document is "predecisional" when it is "prepared in order to assist an agency decisionmaker in arriving at his decision." Grumman, 421 U.S. at 184. While a document is predecisional if it "precedes, in temporal sequence, the 'decision' to which it relates," Grand Cent. P'ship,

2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20, 21 Kansi v. U.S. Depst of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42 (D.D.C. 1998) 8 Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23 (D.D.C. 199 7) 7 Kidder v. FBI, 517 F. Supp. 2d 17 (D.D.C. 200 7) 8 Leopold v. Office ofDirector of National Intelligence, No. 16-2517 (CKK), 2020 WL 805380 (D.D.C. Feb.

U.S. 168, 184 (1975)). A document is "predecisional" when it is "prepared in order to assist an agency decisionmaker in arriving at his decision." Grumman, 421 U.S. at 184. While a document is predecisional if it "precedes, in temporal sequence, the 'decision' to which it relates," Grand Cent. P'ship,

2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20, 21 Kansi v. U.S. Depst of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42 (D.D.C. 1998) 8 Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23 (D.D.C. 199 7) 7 Kidder v. FBI, 517 F. Supp. 2d 17 (D.D.C. 200 7) 8 Leopold v. Office ofDirector of National Intelligence, No. 16-2517 (CKK), 2020 WL 805380 (D.D.C. Feb.