Epstein Secrets

2020 Ruling, Dated July 29, 2020 (Dkt. 1079) App.-0777 Notice of Appeal, Dated July 29, 2020 (Dkt. 1081) App.-0781 Non-Redacted Declaration of Sigrid S. McCawley In Support of Plaintiff's Motion to Exceed Presumptive Ten Deposition Limit in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(A)(2)(a)(ii), Dated July 30, 202

112210rrbotóriS11/059320 Itibeibig0tat 1 PaOS of 4 App.-0785 Dated: May 27, 2016. Respectfully Submitted, BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP By: /s/ Sigrid McCawlev Sigrid McCawley (Pro Hac Vice) Meredith Schultz (Pro Hac Vice) Boles_ Schiller & Flexner LLP 401 E. David Boies Boles, Schiller & Flexner LLP B

A: Absolutely. 10 THE COURT: You can go over to the corner, too. 11 MR. PAGLIUCA: I think we need a corner bar on this, 12 your Honor. 13 Ms. McCawley, I'm wondering if we can get a mutually 14 convenient date to hear that matter as opposed to next 15 Thursday. 16 MS. McCAWLEY: Of course. 17

week per Non-Party to agree to the excerpts to send to them for review. But on balance we agree that having a sense of the number of participating Non-Parties will aid the Court in conducting future proceedings, we have agreed to Plaintiff's suggestion on that front. The parties can submit a proposed modif

ided Motions. 19 EFTA00075046 CasqaP.1§46t43g-tAltneattarheAFM6804146§k4,26aIniAeL436f 24 Dated: June 24, 2020 20 Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Sigrid S. McCawley Sigrid S. McCawley Counsel for Plaintiji EFTA00075047 caceangfeA1743g ccArelicatiileit7gSrogef0Filgied§(24PagePaO ilof 7 Exhibit A Plaintiff's

2020 20 Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Sigrid S. McCawley Sigrid S. McCawley Counsel for Plaintiji EFTA0

ause only Doe 1 and Doe 2 have received notice of potential sealing thus far, and because the first five motions contain the names of various other Non-Parties, Maxwell contends in her objection that the Court cannot unseal any of the first five motions or their related docket entries until each Non-Party

fessional relationships as well as matters concerning her private affairs." • March 17, 2016 (DE 66 at 9): At hearing on the Protective Order, Ms. McCawley stated "I can have the deposition of the defendant in this case and move this case forward. I will agree to their protective order. I just want tha

aration of Laura A. Menninger in Support of Ms. Maxwell's Reply In Support of Her Objection to Unsealing Sealed Material via ECF on the following: Sigrid S. McCawley Meredith Schultz Bows, $CHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 401 East Las Olas Boulevard, Ste. 1200 Ft. Lauderdale. FL 33301 Bradley J. Edwards Stan J. Potti

f the judicial function," "not considered a judicial document" and enjoys "no presumption of public access."). Further, in addition to Doe 1, other Non-Parties are included in DE's 185-3, 185-11, 185- 14 and 185-15 each of whom has not yet been notified or had the opportunity to object under this Court's Pr