From: To: Cc: (USANYS)" (USANYS)" (USANYS)" [=. Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:58:13 +0000 Attachments: 2019-02-28,_JE,_letter re_all_writs_act_application,_15_Civ_7433_(RWS).pdf; 2019-02- 28, JEJetter_re_all_writs_act_application,_17_Civ_0616_(SN).pdf Pottinger was a lawyer at Boies Schiller who represented the plaintiff in the civil action. The two letters we submitted in connection with our All Writs Application are attached. From: (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 11:53 AM To: (USANYS) Subject: RE: Question re A1N/Maxwell Suppression Hearing Another Q: who's Stan Pottinger? From: (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, lune 16, 2021 10:53 AM To: (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) <a> Subject: RE: Question re A1N/Maxwell Suppression Hearing From: (USANYS) < Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 10:40 AM To: (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) <a> Subject: RE: Question re A1N/Maxwell Suppression Hearing Can I see our original application to Judge Sweet? And I assume there was no transcript before Judge S? From: (USANYS) Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 5:45 PM To: (USANYS) < Cc: (USANYS) (USANYS) < Subject: RE: Question re A1N/Maxwell Suppression Hearing In the spirit of completeness, I'm also attaching their replies. From: (USANYS) Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 5:20 PM To: (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) Subject: Re: Question re A1N/Maxwell Suppression Hearing (USANYS) < EFTA00032757

Goodness! Associate U.S. Attorney Southern District of New York On Jun 15, 2021, at 5:06 PM, (USANYS) < wrote: She filed 12 (!!) separate MOLs as a way to evade the Court's page limits. Defense attorneys have started doing that over the last few years. From: (USANYS) < Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 4:25 PM To: (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) ; Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing Dumb Q: why does Maxwell have two memos of law? From: (USANYS) Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 2:19 PM To: (USANYS) < Cc: (USANYS)< >; Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing (USANYS) < (USANYS) < Per our discussion, I am attaching: (1) Maxwell's two briefs raising the suppression argument; (2) the transcript of the McMahon proceedings and her opinion (Ex D, E, G); (3) our brief (see pp 59-115); and (4) the exhibits we attached to our motion (Ex 4-7). Judge Nathan has said that she will resolve the suppression motions "at a later time" ahead of trial. Thanks very much. From: (USANYS) < Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 10:09 AM To: (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing Sure, set a time other than 2:00. I'm in the office. Or Webex From: (USANYS) Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 9:11AM To: (USANYS) < Cc: (USANYS) ; Subject: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing Hi=, (USANYS) < (USANYS) < EFTA00032758

We had an issue come up related to the upcoming suppression hearing (no date set yet, although we expect one) related to Rossmiller/Kramer that we'd like your thoughts on. Let us know a convenient time to stop by over the next few days, thanks. Chief, Public Corruption Unit U.S. Attorney's Office Southern District of New York EFTA00032759