From: To: Subject: RE: records management (Epstein investigation) Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 22:07:42 +0000 Importance: Normal Yes I told =esterday to get a status, She is out today and tomorrow. On Maillia )M, Have .ust check on the status ofThe documents. wrote: On May 23, 2019 6:02 PM wrote: Agreed, The documents have not arrived yet, Pm out tomorrow but we can discuss after the holiday. Thanks O 23, 2019 5:32 PM, ✓rote: ere are the documents now? I don't think we're adamantly opposed to use of the outside vendor, but I don't think it's smart for the documents to go directly to them. We should get them, assess the inventory of records and then talk about getting the appropriate records to SDNY. Frorn Sent: Thursday May 23 2019 4:58 PM i Subject: FW: records management (Epstein investigation) See below, SDNY advised they have used these types of services before in the past. Fro Sen :Thursday, May 23, 2019 1:58 PM u •le : records managemen ps em roves Wanted to quickly follow up on this to see if there's any update on status (both in terms of whether the documents are en route, and also the prospects for our office managing the vendor process)? Please let us know when you have a chance? And if anything else from us would be helpful, we're happy to do whatever we can to get the gears turning. EFTA00037331

thanks again, Sent: Monday. May 20 2019 17:33 Subject: RE: records management (Epstein investigation) Thanks very much again for talking with us earlier, and we wanted to get you the example cases as promised—it's a number of cases so hopefully that's helpful. I think the ideal would be for the materials to come directly to us so our paralegals can manage the process with the vendor (unless the documents are already on their way to the New York field office), and then we can send them either to you or back to Florida once they've been scanned. The following investigations have been with our office and FBI where we've used outside vendors, including for original and highly sensitive documents (such as medical records, personnel records, etc.): U.S. v. Chamber U.S. v. Adelglass, U.S. v. Ng Lop Se U.S. v. Tortora, o U.S. v. Ashraf Ha U.S. v. Goldbren U.S. v. Vargas, h U.S. v. Krupkin, d U.S. v. Cruz, over In terms of the vendor, we choose from a small number of organizations that work with us regularly, and they keep all the information strictly confidential (by contractual requirement, most importantly, though also from a desire to be able to continue to get work with us). I'm not aware of any instances where that has been a problem. Please do let us know if any other info would be helpful, and we're also happy to chat with anybody who wants to talk with us about it, and hopefully we can finalize this week. PknnLc ann. EFTA00037332