Trove
Sign In Sign Up

ALISON J. NATHAN

Person
Mentions
2353
Relationships
101
Events
478
Documents
1160
Search

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.

Event Timeline

Interactive Timeline: Hover over events to see details. Events are arranged chronologically and alternate between top and bottom for better visibility.
101 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Judge defendant
54 Very Strong
90
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Defendant judge
24 Very Strong
33
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Judicial
21 Very Strong
66
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Defendant judge
19 Very Strong
19
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Legal representative
12 Very Strong
40
View
organization The government
Professional
10 Very Strong
6
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Professional
10 Very Strong
46
View
person the defendant
Judicial
10 Very Strong
6
View
person Christian R. Everdell
Professional
10 Very Strong
7
View
person Bobbi C. Sternheim
Professional
10 Very Strong
11
View
person defendant
Judicial
9 Strong
5
View
person Paula Speer
Professional
8 Strong
4
View
person AUDREY STRAUSS
Professional
8 Strong
4
View
organization U.S. government
Legal representative
8 Strong
4
View
person MAURENE COMEY
Prosecutor judge
7
3
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Judicial authority
7
3
View
person MAXWELL
Judicial
7
2
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Judicial assignment
7
3
View
person Jeffrey S. Pagliuca
Legal representative
7
3
View
person United States Government
Professional
7
3
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Judge defendant
7
3
View
person the defendant
Judge defendant
6
2
View
person Juror 50
None
6
2
View
organization The government
Legal representative
6
2
View
person defendant
Professional
6
1
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
2020-12-28 N/A Order concerning Ghislaine Maxwell; Court DENIES the Defendant's renewed motion for release on bail. Court View
2020-12-28 N/A Entry of Order Denying Defendant's Renewed Motion for Release on Bail USDC SDNY View
2020-12-28 N/A Court DENIES Defendant's renewed motion for release on bail. Court View
2020-12-23 N/A Order signed by Judge Nathan adopting Defendant's proposed redactions. Court View
2020-12-23 N/A Court Order regarding sealing and redactions of Defendant's reply. Court View
2020-12-23 Court order The Defendant was ordered to docket redacted documents and corresponding exhibits. New York, New York View
2020-12-23 N/A Deadline for the Defendant to docket redacted documents and corresponding exhibits. New York, New York View
2020-12-23 N/A Court Order filed granting Defendant's proposed redactions USDC SDNY View
2020-12-23 Court filing The court order (Document 101) was electronically filed. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... View
2020-12-18 N/A Government ordered to docket redacted documents. Court View
2020-12-18 N/A Deadline for the Government to docket redacted documents and corresponding exhibits New York, New York View
2020-12-18 Legal filing Submission of a letter to Judge Nathan requesting to file two versions of the Reply Memorandum of... United States District Cour... View
2020-12-18 Court order Judge Alison J. Nathan issued an order regarding the Government's opposition to Ghislaine Maxwell... N/A View
2020-12-18 N/A Order signed by Judge Nathan adopting Government's proposed redactions. Court View
2020-12-15 Legal filing Submission of a statement by Annie Farmer opposing Ghislaine Maxwell's renewed motion for bail. United States District Cour... View
2020-12-15 Legal filing Annie Farmer submitted a statement to the court opposing Ghislaine Maxwell's renewed motion for b... United States District Cour... View
2020-12-14 Court filing A letter by Ghislaine Maxwell, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan, was filed regarding her renew... N/A View
2020-12-14 Court order Judge Nathan issued an order adopting Ghislaine Maxwell's proposed redactions for her renewed bai... Court View
2020-12-14 Court filing A letter from Ghislaine Maxwell to Judge Nathan regarding her renewed bail application was filed. N/A View
2020-12-14 Court order Judge Alison J. Nathan issued an order adopting Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell's proposed redactions... N/A View
2020-12-14 Court order/ruling The Court ordered the Defendant to docket redacted documents and corresponding exhibits, finding ... New York, New York View
2020-12-14 Legal filing The court order (Document 95) was electronically filed. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... View
2020-12-10 Court filing A transcript of proceedings for a conference held on 7/14/2020 regarding Ghislaine Maxwell was fi... N/A View
2020-12-10 Court filing A transcript and notice of filing for a conference held on July 14, 2020, were filed. Deadlines f... Court View
2020-12-08 N/A Judge Nathan denies request to summon Warden Tellez but orders Government to submit written updat... Court Docket View

DOJ-OGR-00001805.jpg

This document is a legal letter filed on October 23, 2020, by attorney Jeffrey Pagliuca on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The defense argues that the Government has failed to meet discovery deadlines promised during the July 14, 2020, initial conference, particularly regarding investigative files from the Southern District of Florida. The letter criticizes the Government's recent production as lacking substance, noting it consists largely of civil litigation documents and old records related to Jeffrey Epstein rather than the charged conspiracy.

Legal correspondence / court filing (defense letter to judge)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001799.jpg

This legal document is a letter dated October 14, 2020, from attorney Christian R. Everdell to Judge Alison J. Nathan. Everdell argues against the government's request to delay the disclosure of evidence to his client, Ms. Maxwell, in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. He asserts the government has not provided sufficient legal justification, such as risks to an ongoing investigation or witness safety, and asks the court to order the immediate production of the materials to the defense.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001795.jpg

A legal letter dated October 14, 2020, from Ghislaine Maxwell's attorney, Christian R. Everdell, to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The defense opposes the government's request to delay the disclosure of evidence (photographs and documents) related to alleged victims of Jeffrey Epstein. The defense argues that these materials are exculpatory under Brady v. Maryland because the witnesses allege abuse by Epstein but do not accuse Maxwell of participation.

Legal correspondence / court filing
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001794.jpg

This document is the conclusion page (page 8) of a legal filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), dated October 7, 2020. Submitted by Acting US Attorney Audrey Strauss and Assistant US Attorneys Comey, Moe, and Pomerantz to Judge Alison J. Nathan, the text affirms the Government's commitment to its disclosure obligations following representations made at an initial conference.

Legal court filing (conclusion page)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001789.jpg

This document is Page 3 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, likely United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated October 7, 2020, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The text outlines legal precedents determining the scope of the 'prosecution team' for discovery purposes (Rule 16 and Brady), arguing that the prosecution is not obligated to produce records from other government agencies (like the SEC or components of the DOJ/FBI) unless a specific 'joint investigation' occurred. It cites various cases (Middendorf, Collins, Stein) to establish the criteria for what constitutes a joint investigation.

Court filing (legal memorandum/letter motion)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001788.jpg

This document is Page 2 of a court filing (likely from United States v. Maxwell based on the case number) dated October 7, 2020, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The Government updates the court on discovery progress, committing to a November 9, 2020 deadline for electronic discovery and outlining schedules for producing witness statements (Brady/Giglio materials) 4 to 8 weeks before trial. The document also argues the legal scope of the prosecution's obligations, citing case law (Avellino, Quinn) to assert that the prosecution is not responsible for knowledge held by other government agencies (like the FBI) not directly involved in the investigation.

Court filing (letter to judge regarding discovery)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001779.jpg

This is a letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding 'United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell'. The Government requests permission to delay the disclosure of sensitive photographs and documents related to victims of Jeffrey Epstein to the defense until eight weeks before trial, citing risks to an ongoing investigation and victim privacy. The defense counsel has objected to this request.

Legal letter / court filing (government motion to delay disclosure)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001768.jpg

This legal document is a letter dated August 24, 2020, from Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan. Pagliuca argues on behalf of his client, Ms. Maxwell, for a limited request to present sealed materials to other judicial officers, asserting that the materials are judicial documents and that disclosure would not compromise grand jury secrecy. The letter contends that the government has failed to provide a sufficient reason to prevent this limited disclosure.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001767.jpg

This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated August 24, 2020, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. It argues that Protective Orders can be modified as circumstances change and asserts that Ms. Maxwell did not waive her right to seek modification. The text claims the government circumvented Second Circuit processes regarding civil materials for grand jury use and cites various case laws supporting the court's power to modify protective orders.

Legal filing / letter motion (defense reply)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001766.jpg

This legal document, dated August 24, 2020, is a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The filing argues against the government's opposition to sharing sealed materials with two arbiters, dismissing the government's concerns about dissemination as 'hyperbole'. It also criticizes a government suggestion for unsealing materials in other courts as 'baffling' and improper, citing American Bar Association standards against ex parte communications.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001762.jpg

This is the signature page (page 3 of 3) of a legal document submitted by Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to The Honorable Alison J. Nathan on August 24, 2020. The document is part of case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN and was officially filed on September 8, 2020. A copy was also sent via email to the Counsel of Record.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001759.jpg

This document is the final page of a letter motion dated August 17, 2020, from Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The motion, filed on September 2, 2020, formally requests on behalf of Ms. Maxwell that the court modify an existing Protective Order. The modification would permit Ms. Maxwell to refer to and file specific, redacted material under seal.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001758.jpg

This legal document, dated August 17, 2020, is a filing addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan on behalf of Ms. Maxwell. It argues for the court's discretion in handling certain materials, citing legal precedent from the Second Circuit for staying civil proceedings during a related criminal case to protect Fifth Amendment rights. The filing also discusses the proper jurisdiction for interpreting a protective order from a separate civil case, suggesting the government has previously agreed that the civil court, not this criminal court, is the appropriate forum.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001757.jpg

This is page 6 of a legal document dated August 17, 2020, filed in a case before Judge Alison J. Nathan. The filing argues on behalf of Ms. Maxwell for the modification of a Protective Order, claiming that secrecy surrounding a government investigation and grand jury subpoena has undermined the fairness of the adversarial process and unfairly disadvantaged her.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001756.jpg

This legal document is page 5 of a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated August 17, 2020. The filing argues that the government has violated the spirit of a Protective Order by its handling of discovery materials, particularly in relation to their potential use in civil litigation and a grand jury investigation. The defense cites previous assurances from the government and a letter from Alex Rossmiller, which the Court relied upon, to argue that a new request should be granted by the Court.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001755.jpg

This is a page from a legal filing dated August 17, 2020, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of Ghislaine Maxwell. The document discusses the government's ex parte applications dating back to February 2019, Maxwell's arrest on July 2, 2020, and the superseding indictment filed on July 8, 2020, which alleges she facilitated Epstein's abuse of minors and committed perjury in 2016. A footnote details the timeline of discovery materials being transferred to the defense counsel.

Legal correspondence / court filing
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001754.jpg

Page 3 of a legal letter addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan dated August 17, 2020, filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The majority of the page is heavily redacted. The visible text under the heading 'The Material' discusses the government contacting an unnamed party prior to February 2019 and serving a subpoena to produce materials, noting that Ms. Maxwell was not served with something specific.

Legal correspondence / court filing
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001753.jpg

This is page 2 of a legal filing from August 17, 2020, in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The document concerns a dispute over materials designated as 'Confidential' by the government, arguing that under Second Circuit precedent, they are 'judicial documents' with a right to public access. It states that Ms. Maxwell has objected to the designation and seeks to provide the materials under seal to judicial officers to resolve pending issues.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001752.jpg

This document is a letter motion dated August 17, 2020, from attorney Jeffrey Pagliuca on behalf of his client, defendant Ghislaine Maxwell, to Judge Alison J. Nathan of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The motion requests a modification of the existing protective order to allow Maxwell's defense to refer to and file under seal certain discovery materials provided by the government on August 5 and August 13, 2020. The defense argues this is necessary for the fair determination of issues in what is referred to as the "Other Matters".

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001747.jpg

This document is a Memorandum Opinion and Order from the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, dated September 2, 2020. It addresses Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell's motion to modify a protective order to file discovery materials under seal in civil cases. The Court adopts the Government's proposed redactions, citing the need to balance public access with factors like an ongoing grand jury investigation, and orders the parties to confer on further redactions.

Legal document (memorandum opinion and order)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001746.jpg

This is the final page (4 of 4) of a court order from United States District Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The judge denied the defendant's requests (Dkt. No. 38) without prejudice and ordered the Government to submit status updates every 90 days regarding Maxwell's confinement conditions, specifically focusing on her ability to access legal materials and communicate with counsel.

Court order / legal ruling
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001743.jpg

A court order from Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated August 25, 2020. The judge denies Maxwell's requests to immediately disclose the identities of three alleged victims and to order the BOP to move her to the general population, citing that the request for identities is premature as discovery has just begun.

Court order / memorandum opinion
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001742.jpg

This is the second and final page of a court filing (Document 48) dated August 24, 2020, in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It contains the signature block of attorney Laura A. Menninger of Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C., addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan, with a copy sent to all counsel of record.

Court filing / legal correspondence (signature page)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001741.jpg

This document is a letter motion dated August 24, 2020, from attorney Laura A. Menninger to Judge Alison J. Nathan of the Southern District of New York. The attorney requests permission to file documents under seal on behalf of her client, Ghislaine Maxwell, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The justification for the request is that the documents contain information designated as confidential by the Government under the terms of the existing Protective Order in the case.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00001740.jpg

This document is the final page of a legal filing from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated August 21, 2020. The Government respectfully requests that the Court schedule a date approximately 180 days in the future for them to provide an update on their position regarding the sealing of documents in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. The filing is submitted by Acting U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss and her assistants Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, and Lara Pomerantz.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source
Total Received
$0.00
0 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
0 total transactions
No financial transactions found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.
As Sender
4
As Recipient
1
Total
5

Response Deadline

From: ALISON J. NATHAN
To: the government

Order to respond to Defendant's letter by 5:00 p.m. on Oct 15, 2021.

Order
2021-10-15
Communication Source

Order on Redactions

From: ALISON J. NATHAN
To: Parties

Judge adopts proposed redactions for specific motions.

Order
2021-02-04
Communication Source

Order referenced as Dkt. No. 89

From: ALISON J. NATHAN
To: Parties in the case

A previous court order from December 7, 2020, which the Defendant's filing was in accordance with.

Court order
2020-12-07
Communication Source

Endorsement on Letter Motion

From: ALISON J. NATHAN
To: Defendant (Maxwell)

The Court sees no basis for sealing this letter. Defendant must justify sealing by Dec 2, 2020, or file publicly.

Court order
2020-11-25
Communication Source

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN

From: Defense counsel (implied)
To: ALISON J. NATHAN

Legal arguments regarding 'The Material' and subpoena service issues.

Letter
2020-08-17
Communication Source

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search