DOJ-OGR-00015118.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 804 Filed 08/06/25 Page 23 of 27

BINDER &
SCHWARTZ

Neil S. Binder
Binder & Schwartz LLP
675 Third Avenue, 26th Floor
New York, NY 10017

(T) 212.510.7031
(F) 212.510.7299
nbinder@binderschwartz.com

CONFIDENTIAL – SUBMITTED UNDER SEAL

August 5, 2025

Hon. Paul A. Engelmayer
United States District Judge
Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse
40 Foley Square
New York, NY 10007

Re: United States v. Maxwell, No. 20-cr-330 (S.D.N.Y.)

Dear Judge Engelmayer:

We represent
On the late afternoon of Friday, August 1, through different counsel, were
informed by the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ” or “the government”) that they are
referenced in some capacity in the sealed grand jury materials that are the subject of DOJ’s
recent motion for unsealing. See U.S. Mot. to Unseal Grand Jury Trs., July 18, 2025, Dkt. No.
785. requested from the government information about the context in
which are named in these materials in order to inform our arguments regarding the
continued sealing of the grand jury materials. The government has declined to provide us with
any information. Absent such information, we cannot respond with specificity to any reference
in the record concerning Specificity in this context may not be required, however, as
Supreme Court precedent and caselaw in this Circuit make clear what this Court recognized in its
July 22, 2025 Order—i.e., that there is “long-established policy [of] maintain[ing] the secrecy of
the grand jury proceedings in the federal courts.” United States v. Procter & Gamble Co., 356
U.S. 677, 681 (1958); see also In re Grand Jury Investigation of Cuisinarts, Inc., 665 F.2d 24, 28
(2d Cir. 1981) (“This time-honored policy of secrecy has been the most essential, indeed
indispensable, characteristic of grand jury proceedings.”). Indeed, this requirement of secrecy
has been codified in Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e). While the Second Circuit has
recognized that there are certain “special circumstances” outside of Rule 6(e)¹ that may justify
the unsealing of grand jury records, the burden of demonstrating those special circumstances is
even greater than the already heavy burden of demonstrating the applicability of one of the
exceptions enumerated in Rule 6(e). See In re Petition of Craig, 131 F.3d 99, 106 n.10 (2d Cir.
1997).

¹ The government does not point to any of the statutory exceptions enumerated in Rule 6(e) to justify the need for
disclosure here, instead relying solely on “special circumstances” outside the bounds of those exceptions as
articulated in In re Petition of Craig, 131 F.3d 99 (2d Cir. 1997). U.S. Mot. to Unseal Grand Jury Trs. at 3, July 18,
2025, Dkt. No. 785.

DOJ-OGR-00015118