Epstein Secrets

. Supp. 3d 237, 243 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); United States v. Earls, No. 03-CR-0364 (NRB), 2004 WL 350725, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 25, 2004); United States v. Reyes, 162 F.R.D. 468, 470 (S.D.N.Y. 1995). Rule 17(c)(3) provides that "[a]fter [an indictment] is filed, a subpoena requiring the production of persona

or Rule 17(c) subpoenas, the application was made ex parte and under seal on the ground that it reveals defense strategy. See e.g., United States v. Skelos, No. 15-CR-317 (KMW), 2018 WL 2254538, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. May 17, 2018), aff'd, 988 F.3d 645 (2d Cir. 2021); United States v. Wey, 252 F. Supp. 3d 237

d is not intended as a general "fishing expedition." United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 699-700 (1974) (footnote omitted); see United States v. Skelos, 988 F.3d 645, 661 (2d Cir. 2021) (affirming a decision to quash subpoenas through application of Nixon); United States v. Pena, No. 15 Cr. 551 (AIN

ollowed the practice of permitting both the defense and the Government to submit ex parte applications for Rule 17(c) subpoenas."); United States v. Reyes, 162 F.R.D. 468, 470 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) (permitting ex parte applications because a party must "detail its trial strategy or witness list in order to

d is not intended as a general "fishing expedition." United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 699-700 (1974) (footnote omitted); see United States v. Skelos, 988 F.3d 645, 661 (2d Cir. 2021) (affirming a decision to quash subpoenas through application of Nixon); United States v. Pena, No. 15 Cr. 551 (AJN

ollowed the practice of permitting both the defense and the Government to submit ex parte applications for Rule 17(c) subpoenas."); United States v. Reyes, 162 F.R.D. 468, 470 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) (permitting ex parte applications because a party must "detail its trial strategy or witness list in order to