Epstein Secrets

ed States v. Martoma, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182959 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) 4, 5 United States v. Noel, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.) 4 United States v. Perez, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7500 (D. Conn. June 16, 2006) 3 STATUTES 5 U.S.C. § 552 2, 10 OTHER AUTHORITIES Ali Watkins & Michael Gold, Jeffrey Eps

han recite the boilerplate rationale for protecting deliberative documents. (Gov't Reply Br., at 17-18.) That is not enough. In order to satisfy the Amendment's standard, BOP "must explain how a particular Exemption 5 withholding would harm [its] deliberative process." Nat? Day Laborer Org. Network v. U.S

ed States v. Martoma, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182959 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) 4, 5 United States v. Noel, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.) 4 United States v. Perez, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7500 (D. Conn. June 16, 2006) 3 STATUTES 5 U.S.C. § 552 2, 10 OTHER AUTHORITIES Ali Watkins & Michael Gold, Jeffrey Eps

han recite the boilerplate rationale for protecting deliberative documents. (Gov't Reply Br., at 17-18.) That is not enough. In order to satisfy the Amendment's standard, BOP "must explain how a particular Exemption 5 withholding would harm [its] deliberative process." Nat? Day Laborer Org. Network v. U.S

ed States v. Martoma, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182959 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) 4, 5 United States v. Noel, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.) 4 United States v. Perez, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7500 (D. Conn. June 16, 2006) 3 STATUTES 5 U.S.C. § 552 2, 10 OTHER AUTHORITIES Ali Watkins & Michael Gold, Jeffrey Eps

han recite the boilerplate rationale for protecting deliberative documents. (Gov't Reply Br., at 17-18.) That is not enough. In order to satisfy the Amendment's standard, BOP "must explain how a particular Exemption 5 withholding would harm [its] deliberative process." Nat? Day Laborer Org. Network v. U.S