Epstein Secrets

t 1, United States v. Noel, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. No. 22; Memorandum of Law of the United States of America in Opposition to Defendant Michael Thomas's Motion to Compel, United States v. Noel, at 8-9, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. No. 35. The fact that materials at issue have been disclosed t

purposes. See Supp. Christenson Decl. ¶ 29. ii. Disclosure of the Records Would Interfere with Pending Criminal Proceedings BOP properly withheld the Tartaglione Records' under Exemption 7(A). The Capone and Supplemental Capone Declarations explain why release of the Tartaglione Records would interfere with the Tarta

t 1, United States v. Noel, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. No. 22; Memorandum of Law of the United States of America in Opposition to Defendant Michael Thomas's Motion to Compel, United States v. Noel, at 8-9, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. No. 35. The fact that materials at issue have been disclosed t

purposes. See Supp. Christenson Decl. ¶ 29. ii. Disclosure of the Records Would Interfere with Pending Criminal Proceedings BOP properly withheld the Tartaglione Records' under Exemption 7(A). The Capone and Supplemental Capone Declarations explain why release of the Tartaglione Records would interfere with the Tarta

t 1, United States v. Noel, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. No. 22; Memorandum of Law of the United States of America in Opposition to Defendant Michael Thomas's Motion to Compel, United States v. Noel, at 8-9, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. No. 35. The fact that materials at issue have been disclosed t

enforcement purposes. See Supp. Decl. ¶ 29. ii. Disclosure of the Records Would Interfere with Pending Criminal Proceedings BOP properly withheld the Tartaglione Records' under Exemption 7(A). The and Supplemental Declarations explain why release of the Tartaglione Records would interfere with the Tartaglione prose