Epstein Secrets

nt to Local Rule 7.1(a)(3), undersigned counsel contacted counsel for Plaintiffs and counsel for the United States. Assistant United States Attorney Dexter Lee reported that the United States does not oppose the Motion to Intervene. Bradley Edwards, Esq., counsel for Plaintiffs reported that they oppose th

ractual terms except price, quantity and delivery dates were identical to those in the original contract. The former Army employee may not represent Munitions in connection with this modification, because it is part of the same particular matter involving specific parties as the original contract. Westla

. 12. I never learned any confidential, non-public information about the Epstein matter. 13. In late December 2007, I had an "exit meeting" with Dexter Lee, the Office's ethics officer. As part of that meeting, Mr. Lee reviewed with me the Department of Justice's post-employment restrictions. Based on

tractual terms except price, quantity and delivery date. were 'deadest to those in the original contract. The former Army employee may not represent Munitions in connection with this modification, because it is part of the same particular matter involving specific parties as the original comma WestlawNex

r. 12. I never teamed any confidential, non-public information about the Epstein matter. 13. In late December 2007, I had an "exit meeting" with Dexter Lee, the Office's ethics officer. As part of that meeting, Mr. Lee reviewed with me the Department of Justice's post-employment restrictions. Based on

tractual terms except price, quantity and delivery date. were 'deadest to those in the original contract. The former Army employee may not represent Munitions in connection with this modification, because it is part of the same particular matter involving specific parties as the original comma WestlawNex