wever, the government "must bear the burden for any lack of clarity in the agreement and ambiguities should be resolved in favor of the defendant." Innes v. Dalsheim, 864 F.2d 974, 979 (2d Cir. 1988). Here, the NPA unambiguously precludes prosecution of Epstein's potential co- conspirators, and the in

wever, the government "must bear the burden for any lack of clarity in the agreement and ambiguities should be resolved in favor of the defendant." Innes v. Dalsheim, 864 F.2d 974, 979 (2d Cir. 1988). Here, the NPA unambiguously precludes prosecution of Epstein's potential co- conspirators, and the in

rt' Id w «Ss es•••••44 blesen «IS , nats ni ns linein aa ne nellen inin ne in> dep gs In • olin wen nefinenine4 Wens esa is 011ins Sst» *ss Innes lus aa empinobiln isi in anus 10000 "ion op sonineng nes ss Wen iinen si nies nne•ner fer ion de•sens ~emir • a• 4.4~, ~Ne "••• waasm A. •~*"

Second Circuit has stated, Icjomparing a criminal defend- ant to a merchant in the marketplace is an inappro- priate analogy that we have rejected." Innes v. Dalsheitn, 864 F.2d 974, 978 (2d Cir.1988), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 809, 110 S.Ct. 50, 107 L.Ed.2d 19 (1989). See United States v. Khan, 920 F.2