Epstein Secrets

lized. See Supp. Christenson Decl. ¶ 16. These prior versions of the ultimate response document were properly withheld under Exemption 5 as drafts. See American Civil Liberties Union v. Dep't ofJustice, 844 F.3d 126, 133 (2d Cir. 2016); Amnesty Int'l USA v. CIA, 728 F. Supp. 2d 479, 518 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) ("It is well- settled that

emonstrate a "rational link" between the requested public disclosure and interference with ongoing or prospective investigations or proceedings. See Crooker v. Bureau of 4 Through counsel, plaintiff has also agreed not to challenge the application of Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F) to such information in records withhel

lized. See Supp. Christenson Decl. ¶ 16. These prior versions of the ultimate response document were properly withheld under Exemption 5 as drafts. See American Civil Liberties Union v. Dep't ofJustice, 844 F.3d 126, 133 (2d Cir. 2016); Amnesty Int'l USA v. CIA, 728 F. Supp. 2d 479, 518 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) ("It is well- settled that

emonstrate a "rational link" between the requested public disclosure and interference with ongoing or prospective investigations or proceedings. See Crooker v. Bureau of 4 Through counsel, plaintiff has also agreed not to challenge the application of Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F) to such information in records withhel

it was finalized. See Supp. Decl. ¶ 16. These prior versions of the ultimate response document were properly withheld under Exemption 5 as drafts. See American Civil Liberties Union v. Dep't ofJustice, 844 F.3d 126, 133 (2d Cir. 2016); Amnesty Int'l USA v. CIA, 728 F. Supp. 2d 479, 518 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) ("It is well- settled that

emonstrate a "rational link" between the requested public disclosure and interference with ongoing or prospective investigations or proceedings. See Crooker v. Bureau of Through counsel, plaintiff has also agreed not to challenge the application of Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F) to such information in records withheld