Epstein Secrets

uld try to influence individual grand jurors to vote against indictment. In re Sealed Case No. 98-3077, 151 F.3d 1059, 1070 (D.C.Cir. 1998), quoting Douglas Oil Co. of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 219 (1979). Mr. Epstein, on the other hand has his own personal privacy and reputational int

overnment actors subject to the Rule 6(e) disclosure prohibition. See, e.g., United States v. Barry, 865 F.2d 1317 (D.C.Cir. 1989); United States v. Blalock, 844 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1988); Eisenberg, supra. If, as in these cases, private individuals may be entitled to relief after there has been a Rule

and jurors to vote against indictment. 7 EFTA_R1_00004157 EFTA01731377 In m Sealed Case NO. 98-3077, 151 F.3d 1059, 1070 (D.C.Cir. 1998),quoting Douglas Oil Co. of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest 441 U.S. 211, 219 (1979). Mr. Epstein. on the other hand has his own personal privacy and reputational inte

vernment actors subject to the Rule 6(e) disclosure prohibition. See, e.g., United States v. Barry, 865 F.2d 1317 (D.C.Cir. 1989); United States it Blalock, 844 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1988); Eisenberg, supra. If, as in these cases, private individuals may be entitled to relief after there has been a Rule

uld try to influence individual grand jurors to vote against indictment. In re Sealed Case NO. 98-3077, 151 F.3d 1059, 1070 (D.C.Cir. 1998), quoting Douglas Oil Co. of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 219 (1979). Mr. Epstein, on the other hand has his own personal privacy and reputational int

vernment actors subject to the Rule 6(e) disclosure prohibition. See, e.g., United States v. Barry, 865 F.2d 1317 (D.C.Cir. 1989); United States v. Blalock, 844 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1988); Eisenberg, supra. If, as in these cases, private individuals may be entitled to relief after there has been a Rule