the destruction of or tampering with evidence, or otherwise seriously jeopardize an investigation, the materials should not be unsealed. See, e.g., Douglas Oil Co. v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 218 n.9 (1979) ("Since the 17th century, grand jury proceedings have been closed to the public; and record

er the Fourth and Fifth Amendments (Motion II) are narrowly tailored to protect the integrity of the Government's ongoing investigation. See, e.g., Douglas Oil Co. v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 218 n.9 (1979) ("Since the 17th century, grand jury proceedings have been closed to the public; and record

re of grand jury materials must make a showing of a "particularized need." United States v. Aisenberg, 358 F.3d 1327, 1348 (11th Cir. 2004) (citing Douglas Oil Co. a Petrol 27 EFTA00085735 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 462 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2019 Page 28 of 32 Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 222

pt the invitation and made no submission. The court then entered an order granting the motions to quash. Applying the balancing test set forth in Douglas Oil Co. v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 99 S.Ct. 1667, 60 L.Ed.2d 156 (1979), the court found that the government had failed to establish a suffi

the invitation and made no submission. The court then entered an order granting the motions to . quash. Applying the balancing test set forth in Douglas Oil Co. v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 99 S.Ct. 1667, 60 L.Ed.2d 156 (1979), the court found that the government had failed to establish a suffi

einger, 626 F. Supp. 2d 1231 (S.D. Fl. 2009): "The proper functioning of our grand jury system depends upon the secrecy of grand jury proceedings," Douglas Oil Co. v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 218 (1979), and this expectation of privacy is generally codified in Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Cri

nger , 626 F. Supp. 2d 1231 (S.D. Fl. 2009): "The proper functioning of our grand jury system depends upon the secrecy of grand jury proceedings," Douglas Oil Co. I Petrol Stops Northwest , 441 U.S. 211, 218 (1979), and this expectation of privacy is generally codified in Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Crim

nger , 626 F. Supp. 2d 1231 (S.D. Fl. 2009): "The proper functioning of our grand jury system depends upon the secrecy of grand jury proceedings," Douglas Oil Co. v. Petrol Stops Northwest , 441 U.S. 211, 218 (1979), and this expectation of privacy is generally codified in Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Cri

uld try to influence individual grand jurors to vote against indictment. In re Sealed Case No. 98-3077, 151 F.3d 1059, 1070 (D.C.Cir. 1998), quoting Douglas Oil Co. of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 219 (1979). Mr. Epstein, on the other hand has his own personal privacy and reputational int

is greater than the need for continued secrecy"; and (3) "that their request is structured to cover only material so needed." Id. at 1348 (citing Douglas Oil Co.,N.W., 441 U.S. 211, 222 (1979)). These demanding standards apply even after the grand jury has concluded its operations. Id. The burden of demonstr

nger , 626 F. Supp. 2d 1231 (S.D. Fl. 2009), "The proper functioning of our grand jury system depends upon the secrecy of grand jury proceedings," Douglas Oil Co. I Petrol Stops Northwest , 441 U.S. 211, 218 (1979), and this expectation of privacy is generally codified in Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Crim

by the corporations which are defendants in the civil case, the considerations . . . militating against disclosure are beside the point.") (citing Douglas Oil Co. of Calif. v. Petrol Stops Nw., 441 U.S. 211 (1979)). In response to such third-party subpoenas to law-enforcement witnesses, we anticipate that it

by the corporations which are defendants in the civil case, the considerations . . . militating against disclosure are beside the point.") (citing Douglas Oil Co. of Calif. v. Petrol Stops Nw., 441 U.S. 211 (1979)). In response to such third-party subpoenas to law-enforcement witnesses, we anticipate that it

by the corporations which are defendants in the civil case, the considerations . . . militating against disclosure are beside the point.") (citing Douglas Oil Co. of Calif. v. Petrol Stops Nw., 441 U.S. 211 (1979)). In response to such third-party subpoenas to law-enforcement witnesses, we anticipate that it

by the corporations which are defendants in the civil case, the considerations . . . militating against disclosure are beside the point.") (citing Douglas Oil Co. of Calif. v. Petrol Stops Nw., 441 U.S. 211 (1979)). In response to such third-party subpoenas to law-enforcement witnesses, we anticipate that it

obtain disclosure and use of grand jury materials covered by the secrecy provisions of Rule 6(e), the petitioner must show a "particularized need." Douglas Oil Co. I Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 223 (1979). The Douglas Oil Court explained that in order to pierce the veil of Rule 6(e) secrecy, [p]arti

obtain disclosure and use of grand jury materials covered by the secrecy provisions of Rule 6(e), the petitioner must show a "particularized need." Douglas Oil Co. v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 223 (1979). The Douglas Oil Court explained that in order to pierce the veil of Rule 6(e) secrecy, [p]arti

he invitation and made no submission. The court then entered an order granting the motions to co. quash. Applying the balancing test set forth in Douglas Oil Co. v. Petrol Stops Nonhwest, 441 U.S. 211, 99 S.Ct. 1667. 60 L.Ed.2d 156 (1979), the court found that the government had failed to establish a suffic

sarily jeopardize the privacy and reputational interests of the named individuals. United States v. Smith, 776 F.2d 1104, 1114 (3d Cir. 1985); cf. Douglas Oil Co. of Ca. v. Petrol Stops NW, 441 U.S. 211, 219 (1979) (observing that grand jury secrecy is designed in part to "assure that persons who are accused

re of grand jury materials must make a showing of a "particularized need." United States v. Aisenberg, 358 F.3d 1327, 1348 (11th Cir. 2004) (citing Douglas Oil Co. v. Petrol 27 EFTA00010568 --- PAGE BREAK --- Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 462 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2019 Page 28 of 32 Stops Northwes