| Subject: | RE: US v Maxwell - [conferrals regarding pretrial disclosures & redactions to replies] |
| Date: | Thu, 22 Apr 2021 21:47:47 +0000 |
Attachments: 2021-04-22_GM_letter_re_Reply_Brief_Exhibit_L.pdf¶
Inline-Images: image001.jpg¶
Per the Court’s order today (Dkt. 232), I intend to file the attached letter on ECF this evening. Please let me know if there is anything you would like to discuss by 8 pm if possible.¶
Thanks,¶
From:¶
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 7:33 PM¶
To: |¶
Subject: RE: US v Maxwell - [conferrals regarding pretrial disclosures & redactions to replies]¶
Great. I will wait to file the briefs until I see your letter hit the docket.¶
From:¶
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 7:32 PM¶
To: |¶
Subject: RE: US v Maxwell - [conferrals regarding pretrial disclosures & redactions to replies]¶
Thanks, . I’m going to file the letter in a few minutes.¶
From:¶
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 7:30 PM¶
To:¶
Subject: RE: US v Maxwell - [conferrals regarding pretrial disclosures & redactions to replies]¶
Cc::¶
This looks good to me, I will go ahead and file Reply Briefs 1 (NPA) and 5 (Severance) on the public docket in unredacted form, with a slip sheet for Ex. A to the NPA brief indicating that it is being filed under seal.¶
EFTA00039820¶
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 7:13 PM¶
From:¶
To:¶
Cc:¶
Subject: RE: US v Maxwell - [conferrals regarding pretrial disclosures & redactions to replies]¶
As discussed, attached is the letter that I plan to file this evening. Please let me know if there is anything you would like to discuss.¶
From:¶
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 2:05 PM¶
To:¶
Cc:¶
Subject: RE: US v Maxwell - [conferrals regarding pretrial disclosures & redactions to replies]¶
Following-up on email, we are not seeking any redactions. As a general matter, the redactions we proposed in our reply briefs are almost entirely because the information was designated as Confidential by the government under the Protective Order. Accordingly, you are free to justify to the court any redactions you think are necessary. Our specific positions on the redactions in each brief are set forth below. Please confirm that the proposed course of action with respect to each brief is acceptable.¶
Reply Brief 1¶
The redactions relate to information designated as Confidential by the government under the Protective Order. The defense has no objection to removing the redaction on page 5 and filing the brief and Exhibit A on the public record. Given that the government takes no position about the redaction on page 5, but does want Exhibit A to remain under seal, we propose the following: (1) we will file the brief on the docket without redactions, but we will file Exhibit A under seal; and (2) the government can argue its position to the court in its letter that Exhibit A should remain under seal. If the judge does not agree, we will file Exhibit A on the docket at that time.¶
Reply Brief 3¶
The redactions in the brief all relate to the names of AUSAs, the names of accusers, and . As to the accusers and , the defense has no objection to removing those redactions. As to the AUSAs, we made those redactions as a courtesy because we did not think it was necessary or appropriate to publicly name the AUSAs. The defense takes no position with respect to those redactions.¶
As for the exhibits, we filed certain exhibits under seal because they were designated as Confidential by the government under the Protective Order. The defense has no objection to filing all of the exhibits on the public record, although we agree that email addresses and other contact information for third parties should be redacted pursuant to the court’s local rules. You point out that the court has already adopted the government’s proposed redactions to Exhibits J and O. The defense is certainly prepared to follow those redactions. But since the government will need to justify the need for other redactions to the court, it makes more sense for the government to explain to the court in its letter that it would like to follow the redactions already adopted by the court for Exhibits J and O.¶
EFTA00039821¶
Given the disagreement among the parties, we will not file the brief or the exhibits on the docket and the government can argue its position to the court in its letter.¶
Reply Brief 5¶
The defense does not believe the redaction on p.4 is necessary. Given the agreement between the parties, we will file the brief unredacted.¶
Reply Brief 6¶
The redactions relate to information designated as Confidential by the government under the Protective Order. The defense has no objection to removing the redactions and filing the brief on the public record. Given that the government wants to keep the redactions, we will not file the brief on the docket and the government can argue its position to the court in its letter.¶
Reply Brief 10¶
The redactions relate to information designated as Confidential by the government under the Protective Order. The defense has no objection to removing the redactions and filing the brief and Exhibit A on the public record. Given that the government wants to keep the redactions and keep Exhibit A under seal, we will not file either document on the docket and the government can argue its position to the court in its letter.¶
Please let me know if you would like to discuss.¶
Regards,¶
From:¶
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2021 8:17 PM¶
Subject: RE: US v Maxwell - [conferrals regarding pretrial disclosures & redactions to replies]¶
We can confirm for 3:00 pm EST tomorrow. Please use the following dial-in number:¶
We will write separately regarding the redactions that you propose.¶
Thanks,¶