Epstein Secrets

vance of all materials submitted to the EVCP. 6 EFTA00103820 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 252 Filed 04/27/21 Page 7 of 9 See United States v. Aguilar, No. CR 07-00030 (SBA), 2008 WL 3182029, at *6 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2008). Maxwell argues that the materials are relevant because they may reveal mone

e Government's briefing regardless of standing as part of its duty to ensure that the subpoena meets the requirements of Nixon. See United States v. Bergstein, No. I6-CR-746 (PKC), 2017 WL 6887596, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 28, 2017). But ex parte Rule 17(c) subpoenas are possible in some circumstances if just

vance of all materials submitted to the EVCP. 6 EFTA00104691 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 252 Filed 04/27/21 Page 7 of 9 See United States v. Aguilar, No. CR 07-00030 (SBA), 2008 WL 3182029, at *6 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2008). Maxwell argues that the materials are relevant because they may reveal mone

e Government's briefing regardless of standing as part of its duty to ensure that the subpoena meets the requirements of Nixon. See United States v. Bergstein, No. I6-CR-746 (PKC), 2017 WL 6887596, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 28, 2017). But ex parte Rule 17(c) subpoenas are possible in some circumstances if just

vance of all materials submitted to the EVCP. 6 EFTA00081410 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 252 Filed 04/27/21 Page 7 of 9 See United States v. Aguilar, No. CR 07-00030 (SBA), 2008 WL 3182029, at *6 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2008). Maxwell argues that the materials are relevant because they may reveal mone

e Government's briefing regardless of standing as part of its duty to ensure that the subpoena meets the requirements of Nixon. See United States v. Bergstein, No. I6-CR-746 (PKC), 2017 WL 6887596, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 28, 2017). But ex parte Rule 17(c) subpoenas are possible in some circumstances if just

ls submitted to the EVCP. 6 EFTA00020303 --- PAGE BREAK --- Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 252 Filed 04/27/21 Page 7 of 9 See United States v. Aguilar, No. CR 07-00030 (SBA), 2008 WL 3182029, at *6 (ND. Cal. Aug. 4, 2008). Maxwell argues that the materials are relevant because they may reveal monet

e Government's briefing regardless of standing as part of its duty to ensure that the subpoena meets the requirements of Nixon. See United States v. Bergstein, No. I6-CR-746 (PKC), 2017 WL 6887596, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 28, 2017). But ex parte Rule 17(c) subpoenas are possible in some circumstances if just