Epstein Secrets

st be either pending or reasonably foreseeable at the time of the withholding. See, e.g.,Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23, 37-38 (D.D.C. 1997) (citing N.L.R.B. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.,437 U.S. 214, 220 (1978)). The government's burden to establish the applicability of Exemption 7(A) is not high; the gov

f Justice, M8 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir. 2 011) 9, 10, 21, 22 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 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

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 of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42, 44 (D.D.C. 1998). 8 EFTA00071567 Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 25 Filed 08/05/20 Page 15 of 30 (

st be either pending or reasonably foreseeable at the time of the withholding. See, e.g.,Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23, 37-38 (D.D.C. 1997) (citing N.L.R.B. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.,437 U.S. 214, 220 (1978)). The government's burden to establish the applicability of Exemption 7(A) is not high; the gov

f Justice, M8 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir. 2 011) 9, 10, 21, 22 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 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

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 of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42, 44 (D.D.C. 1998). 8 EFTA00075450 Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 25 Filed 08/05/20 Page 15 of 30 (

st be either pending or reasonably foreseeable at the time of the withholding. See, e.g.,Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23, 37-38 (D.D.C. 1997) (citing N.L.R.B. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.,437 U.S. 214, 220 (1978)). The government's burden to establish the applicability of Exemption 7(A) is not high; the gov

f Justice, M8 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir. 2 011) 9, 10, 21, 22 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 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

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 of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42, 44 (D.D.C. 1998). 8 EFTA00088684 Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 25 Filed 08/05/20 Page 15 of 30 (