Back to Network
4
Shared Docs
3
Same-Page
4 / 4
Mentions
Document Mentions (4 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
arpenter v. United States would have come out differently, since the defendant's historical cell-site location information was in the possession of MetroPCS and Sprint. 138 S. Ct. 2206, 2212 (2018). But the United States Supreme Court rejected application of the third-party doctrine for two reasons, as t
Maxwell, 325 F. Supp. 3d 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) 6 Matter of Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated Feb. 18, 1988, 685 F. Supp. 49 (S.D.N.Y. 1988) 1 Raheem v. Kelly, 257 F.3d 122 (2d Cir. 2001) 9 Refco Grp. Ltd., LLC v. Cantor Fitzgerald, L.P., No. 13 CIV. 1654 RA HBP, 2014 WL 5420225 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 2
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
arpenter v. United States would have come out differently, since the defendant's historical cell-site location information was in the possession of MetroPCS and Sprint. 138 S. Ct. 2206, 2212 (2018). But the United States Supreme Court rejected application of the third-party doctrine for two reasons, as t
Maxwell, 325 F. Supp. 3d 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) 6 Matter of Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated Feb. 18, 1988, 685 F. Supp. 49 (S.D.N.Y. 1988) 1 Raheem v. Kelly, 257 F.3d 122 (2d Cir. 2001) 9 Refco Grp. Ltd., LLC v. Cantor Fitzgerald, L.P., No. 13 CIV. 1654 RA HBP, 2014 WL 5420225 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 2
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
arpenter v. United States would have come out differently, since the defendant's historical cell-site location information was in the possession of MetroPCS and Sprint. 138 S. Ct. 2206, 2212 (2018). But the United States Supreme Court rejected application of the third-party doctrine for two reasons, as t
Maxwell, 325 F. Supp. 3d 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) 6 Matter of Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated Feb. 18, 1988, 685 F. Supp. 49 (S.D.N.Y. 1988) 1 Raheem v. Kelly, 257 F.3d 122 (2d Cir. 2001) 9 Refco Grp. Ltd., LLC v. Cantor Fitzgerald, L.P., No. 13 CIV. 1654 RA HBP, 2014 WL 5420225 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 2
Sponsored
2 mentions
Page EFTA00018999
Maxwell, 325 F. Supp. 3d 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) 6 Matter of Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated Feb. 18, 1988, 685 F. Supp. 49 (S.D.N.Y. 1988) 1 Raheem v. Kelly, 257 F.3d 122 (2d Cir. 2001) 9 Refco Grp. Ltd., LLC v. Cantor Fitzgerald, L.P., No. 13 CIV. 1654 RA HBP, 2014 WL 5420225 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 2
Page: EFTA00018999 →Page EFTA00019003
arpenter v. United States would have come out differently, since the defendant's historical cell-site location information was in the possession of MetroPCS and Sprint. 138 S. Ct. 2206, 2212 (2018). But the United States Supreme Court rejected application of the third-party doctrine for two reasons, as t
Page: EFTA00019003 →Sponsored
Mutual Connections (46)
Entities connected to both MetroPCS and Raheem
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON13 w/ MetroPCS·6 w/ Raheem
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON6 w/ MetroPCS·6 w/ Raheem
Virginia Giuffre
PERSON9 w/ MetroPCS·2 w/ Raheem
JP
Jeffrey Pagliuca
PERSON4 w/ MetroPCS·6 w/ Raheem
Sprint
ORGANIZATION6 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem
Second Circuit
ORGANIZATION4 w/ MetroPCS·5 w/ Raheem
Stephen Hawking
PERSON5 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem
Carpenter
PERSON5 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem
DI
Darren Indyke
PERSON4 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem
United States
LOCATION6 w/ MetroPCS·2 w/ Raheem
Michael Cohen
PERSON3 w/ MetroPCS·5 w/ Raheem
David Boies
PERSON4 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem
Heath
PERSON4 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem
SW
Sweet
PERSON4 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem
Boies Schiller Flexner LLP
ORGANIZATION4 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem
Schiller
PERSON4 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem
CM
Colleen McMahon
PERSON4 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem
SB
Stephen Rex Brown
PERSON4 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem
Cohen & Gresser LLP
ORGANIZATION3 w/ MetroPCS·5 w/ Raheem
LP
Loretta A. Preska
PERSON4 w/ MetroPCS·4 w/ Raheem