DOJ-OGR-00019453.jpg

Case 1:20-cv-04743-DLC-KNF Document 81 Filed 09/14/20 Page 9 of 13

in her ability to seek redress for the sexual assaults and other tortious conduct on which her
claims are based, as, during the pendency of any stay, she would still be able to participate in that
program.

Overall, and despite Plaintiff’s assertion that a stay would work to her disadvantage, this
Court finds that any generalized prejudice that she would suffer as the result of a stay is not
sufficient to counterbalance the other factors that the Court should consider, which all heavily
favor a stay.

4. The Interests of the Defendant

The private interests of Maxwell, and the burden that she would face in proceeding with
discovery in the civil action at this time are significant. As already noted, if civil discovery were
to proceed, Maxwell would have to make the difficult decision of whether to assert her Fifth
Amendment privilege – a decision that could adversely impact her position in one or the other of
the cases she is defending. See Louis Vuitton, 676 F.3d at 97. Also, due to heightened
restrictions at the MDC during the COVID-19 pandemic (restrictions of which this Court takes
judicial notice), this Court understands that counsel has had difficulty, and will likely continue to
have difficulty, meeting with Maxwell and arranging for her to review documents or otherwise to
confer for the purpose of preparing a defense to this civil case. (See 8/19/20 Menninger Ltr.,
at 5; see also 9/4/20 Menninger Reply Ltr., at 2-3.)

This Court finds that not only the existence of the criminal prosecution against Maxwell,
but also the particularly (and unusually) restrictive circumstances of her current detention, would
necessarily make it harder for Maxwell to participate fully in the discovery process in this action,
and would cause her undue prejudice, weighing strongly in favor of a stay.

9

DOJ-OGR-00019453