ct: RE: draft letter to Netburn No problem, totally understand. From: Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 13:55 To: Cc: Subject: Re: draft letter to Netburn > > > Sorry guys I can't. I keep getting kicked off the vpn, and I'm fighting with my computer, so I haven't been able to do nearly as much work

From: ' )" To: ' )" Subject: RE: draft letter to Netbum Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 18:19:09 +0000 Attachments: 2020-07-22 JE letter to Netburn re order on unsealing.moe.docx Here are some proposed edits. Thanks for drafting this. From: Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 1:55 PM To: Cc: Sub

Subject: RE: draft letter to Netburn Looking at this now. From: Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 1:55 PM To: ) Cc: Subject: RE: draft letter to Netburn No problem, totally understand. From: Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 13:55 To: Cc: Subject: Re: draft letter to Netburn Sorry guys I can't. I

From: ' To: a b"cl Subject: RE: draft letter to Netburn Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 18:12:05 —0000 Attachments: 2020-07-22,_GMJetter_to_Judge_Nathan_re_Local_Rule_23.1.docx PO Sorry guys, I'm having bad tec

cluding Ms. Maxwell. A Protective Order substantially similar to the Protective Order entered in Giuffre v. Maxwell was entered by Magistrate Judge Netburn on November 29, 2018.5 That matter was settled and dismissed on December 20, 2018. Jane Doe 43 also was represented by BSF, the same lawyers who re

rn District of New York From: Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2019 14:29 To: Subject: Jane Doe 43 v. Epstein, et al., 17 Civ. 616 (JGK)(SN) Mr. Judge Netburn was wondering if you have a Word version of the Sealed Order that you can email? Let me know when you get the chance. Tha n Courtroom Deputy to th

Importance: Normal Attachments: 2019-04- 09,_JE, Jetterproviding_additional_authority,_17_Civ_0616_(SN) Jwith_exhibit).pdf To the Chambers of Judge Netburn: In connection with the Government's application relating to the above-captioned case, please see the attached letter, with enclosure, relating to

amped.pdf Mr. Please see the attached PDF for an Order that was filed under seal today in 19-mc-179. Thank ou. Courtroom Deputy to the Hon. Sarah Netburn United States District Court Southern District of New York 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 EFTA00019579

feel free to raise the issue with Nathan and we'll respond. (And I would think our response could basically be a copy-paste of the letter I wrote to Netburn.) We could also note in our response to Jeff and Laura, if we wanted to, that given their awareness of the materials, we assume they will retract t

Settlement And Boies Schiller's Refusal To Comply With The Protective Order 6 D. The Government's False Statements To Judge McMahon 6 E. Judge Netburn Separately Rejects An Identical Gambit By The Government 10 ARGUMENT 11 A. Pursuant To Its Inherent Power, This Court Should Suppress The Evide

Settlement And Boles Schiller's Refusal To Comply With The Protective Order 6 D. The Government's False Statements To Judge McMahon 6 E. Judge Netburn Separately Rejects An Identical Gambit By The Government 10 ARGUMENT 11 A. Pursuant To Its Inherent Power, This Court Should Suppress The Evide

2019 18:57:47 +0000 Importance: Normal Attachments: 2019-02-05, JE,_unsealing_application_and_order,_17_Civ_616 JSN).pdf To the Chambers of Judge Netburn: Please see the attached application and proposed order in connection with the above-captioned case, which the Government respectfully requests be

Settlement And Boies Schiller's Refusal To Comply With The Protective Order 6 D. The Government's False Statements To Judge McMahon 6 E. Judge Netburn Separately Rejects An Identical Gambit By The Government 10 ARGUMENT 11 A. Pursuant To Its Inherent Power, This Court Should Suppress The Evide

ithout objection from the government. The name of the subpoena recipient (Boies Schiller) and the names of Chief Judge McMahon and Magistrate Judge Netburn (who issued their rulings nearly two years ago) certainly cannot alone compromise any such purported investigation. The government submission thus f

h Netburn United States District Court Southern District of New York Subject: RE: In Re: Grand Jury Subpoena_19-mc-00179 To the Chambers of Judge Netburn: Please see the attached letter in connection with the order referenced below, in the above-captioned case. Front Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 0

feel free to raise the issue with Nathan and we'll respond. (And I would think our response could basically be a copy-paste of the letter I wrote to Netburn.) We could also note in our response to Jeff and Laura, if we wanted to, that given their awareness of the materials, we assume they will retract t

York United States Courthouse New York, New York 10007 Re: In re Application to Unseal Civil Discovery Materials, USAO No. 2018R01618 Dear Judge Netburn: The Government writes respectfully in connection with its sealed application and proposed order pursuant to the All Writs Act, Title 28, United St