David Oscar Markus
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Client |
21
Very Strong
|
23 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
16
Very Strong
|
12 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
she (unnamed client)
|
Client |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
MARKUS/MOSS PLLC
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Leah S. Saffian
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Christian R. Everdell
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
TODD BLANCHE
|
Professional opposing counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Christian R. Everdell
|
Co counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Christian R. Everdell
|
Professional co counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Melissa Madrigal
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Leah S. Saffian
|
Co counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alison Moe
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lara Pomerantz
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lara Pomerantz
|
Professional opposing counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Petitioner
|
Client |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge Nathan
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Represented by |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
MARKUS/MOSS PLLC
|
Employment |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
CHRISTIAN EVERDELL
|
Co counsel defense team |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
MARKUS/MOSS PLLC
|
Business associate |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
[Redacted] (USANYS)
|
Opposing counsel |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Petitioner
|
Counsel for |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Court order | The court granted the motion for David Oscar Markus to be admitted to practice Pro Hac Vice in th... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2025-08-05 | Court filing | A legal document was filed arguing that the government's motion to unseal grand jury materials sh... | N/A | View |
| 2025-07-28 | N/A | Filing of Reply in Support of Petition for Writ of Certiorari | Supreme Court of the United... | View |
| 2025-07-28 | N/A | Submission of a legal document (petition for certiorari) | N/A | View |
| 2025-07-25 | N/A | Continuation of the proffer meeting. | Office of the United States... | View |
| 2025-07-24 | N/A | Proffer meeting between Ghislaine Maxwell, her attorney, and the Deputy Attorney General. | Office of the United States... | View |
| 2025-07-22 | N/A | Filing of Notice of Appearance by David Oscar Markus | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2025-07-22 | Court order | The court granted the motion of David Oscar Markus for admission to practice Pro Hac Vice, allowi... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2025-07-21 | Notarization | The affidavit signed by David Oscar Markus was notarized. | State of Florida | View |
| 2025-07-21 | Legal filing | David Oscar Markus filed an affidavit in support of a motion to appear pro hac vice in the case o... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2025-07-21 | Legal filing | A Proposed Order for Admission Pro Hac Vice for David Oscar Markus was filed with the court. | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2025-05-09 | N/A | Service of Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of ... | New York, NY (Affidavit exe... | View |
| 2025-04-10 | N/A | Submission of a legal document, likely a petition for certiorari. | N/A | View |
| 2025-03-03 | N/A | Scheduled start of trial US v. Diego Sanudo Sanchez Chocron | Southern District of Florida | View |
| 2025-01-15 | N/A | A copy of the Petitioner's Application for Extension of Time to File Certiorari Petition was serv... | Washington, D.C. | View |
| 2025-01-14 | N/A | Counsel retained (Note: Document likely contains typo saying 2024, context suggests 2025) | N/A | View |
| 2021-07-30 | N/A | Deadline for David Oscar Markus to respond to the court order. | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2021-07-12 | Court filing | Letter filed by David Oscar Markus arguing that a government request should be denied. | S.D.N.Y. | View |
| 2021-06-30 | N/A | The Government filed a letter directed at David Oscar Markus. | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2021-05-17 | Legal filing | A document was e-filed in Case 21-770, as certified by David Oscar Markus. | N/A | View |
| 2021-05-17 | N/A | Submission of legal filing requesting a hearing on confinement conditions | District Court | View |
| 2021-05-17 | Legal filing | Filing of 'Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell’s Renewed Motion for Pretrial Release' in the case No. 21-... | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| 2021-05-17 | N/A | e-filing of legal documents | N/A | View |
| 2021-05-17 | N/A | Filing of Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell’s Renewed Motion for Pretrial Release | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| 2021-05-17 | Legal filing | Filing of a 'Renewed Motion for Pretrial Release' on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell. | UNITED STATES COURT OF APPE... | View |
Signed Maxwell Proffer Agreement (Redacted).pdf
This document is a Proffer Agreement dated July 24, 2025, between Ghislaine Maxwell (represented by attorney David Oscar Markus) and the United States Government (represented by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche). The agreement outlines the terms for a meeting in Tallahassee, Florida, stipulating that statements made by Maxwell generally cannot be used against her in the government's case-in-chief but can be used for leads or impeachment. It explicitly states this is not a cooperation agreement.
20250728111721067_24-1073ReplyInSupportOfPetitionForWritO...
This document is a legal reply brief filed in the Supreme Court on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell (Petitioner) against the United States, dated July 28, 2025. The brief argues that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) signed by Jeffrey Epstein in the Southern District of Florida, which promised not to prosecute 'potential co-conspirators' in 'the United States,' should legally bind other districts like the Southern District of New York. The filing highlights a circuit split on whether US Attorneys can bind other districts and contends that the Second Circuit's decision allowing Maxwell's prosecution violates contract law and the plain text of the agreement.
20250714161447132_Certificate%20-%2024-1073%20-%20Maxwell...
This document is a Certificate of Service filed in the Supreme Court case No. 24-1073, Ghislaine Maxwell v. United States of America, dated July 14, 2025. It certifies that the Solicitor General, D. John Sauer, served the 'Brief for the United States in Opposition' to Maxwell's attorneys, Sara Kropf and David Oscar Markus. The document also includes administrative instructions regarding mail delays at the DOJ and contact information for case management.
20250606115543471_Extension%20Letter%2024-1073%202nd.pdf
This document is a formal request dated June 6, 2025, from Solicitor General D. John Sauer to the Supreme Court Clerk regarding the case Ghislaine Maxwell v. United States (No. 24-1073). The government requests a 30-day extension (until July 14, 2025) to file their response to Maxwell's petition for a writ of certiorari, citing heavy attorney workload. The document notes that Maxwell's counsel (identified in the attached service list as Sara Kropf and David Oscar Markus) does not oppose the extension.
20250509132036202_24-1073%20Affidavit.pdf
This document is an Affidavit of Service filed in the Supreme Court case (No. 24-1073) of Ghislaine Maxwell v. United States. Rina Danielson certifies that on May 9, 2025, she served the 'Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Petitioner' to attorneys for both Maxwell (David Oscar Markus) and the United States (Solicitor General D. John Sauer). The service was performed via Priority Mail and email, with physical copies also sent to the Court via Federal Express.
20250507134103306_Extension%20Letter%2024-1073.pdf
This document is a letter dated May 7, 2025, from U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer to the Clerk of the Supreme Court regarding the case Ghislaine Maxwell v. United States of America (No. 24-1073). The Solicitor General requests a 30-day extension, until June 13, 2025, to file the government's response to Maxwell's petition for a writ of certiorari, citing a heavy workload. Attached is a service list identifying Sara Kropf and David Oscar Markus as counsel for the petitioner.
20250117162420418_AMENDED%20Application%20to%20Extend%20T...
This document is an amended application to the US Supreme Court requesting a 45-day extension for Ghislaine Maxwell to file a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. Her new attorney, David Oscar Markus, cites his recent retention and conflicting trial schedules as reasons for the delay. The application highlights a legal question regarding a circuit split on whether plea agreements are binding on federal prosecutors across different districts.
20250115134822946_Certificate%20of%20Service.pdf
This document is a Certificate of Service filed in the Supreme Court of the United States, indicating that on January 15, 2025, Ghislaine Maxwell's counsel, David Oscar Markus, served an Application for Extension of Time to File Certiorari Petition to the Solicitor General of the United States. The document provides contact information for Ghislaine Maxwell's counsel and the address of the Department of Justice.
EFTA00029695.pdf
An email thread from May 2021 regarding the legal proceedings of Ghislaine Maxwell. Her attorney, David Oscar Markus, notifies prosecutors of his intent to file a renewed bond motion in the Second Circuit following a ruling on conditions of confinement. The prosecutors (internal email) discuss confusion over this strategy, noting the previous ruling was about sleeping conditions, not bail.
EFTA00028701.pdf
This document is an internal email chain within the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS) dated June 2, 2021. It forwards an automated Notice of Docket Activity from the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals indicating that Ghislaine Maxwell's renewed motion for bail was denied. A USANYS staff member comments 'Awesome work!' regarding the court's decision.
EFTA00025177.pdf
This document contains an email chain dated April 27, 2021, among staff at the US Attorney's Office (USANYS), celebrating a court victory in the case United States v. Maxwell (Case 21-58). The emails forward a Notice of Docket Activity from the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals indicating that Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for bail was denied. The staff congratulate a redacted colleague for doing a 'kickass job with this appeal.'
EFTA00023009.pdf
This document is an internal email chain among US Attorney's Office (Southern District of NY) staff celebrating a court order from the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals on April 27, 2021. The court denied Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for bail (Case 21-58). The emails convey congratulations to a redacted team member for their work on the appeal.
EFTA00021119.pdf
An email dated July 9, 2021, from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to a group of recipients including David Oscar Markus, Christian Everdell, Laura Menninger, and Jeff Pagliuca. The email circulates a courtesy copy of a legal filing (Reply_to_Order_Dkt_312.pdf) related to the case U.S. v. Maxwell (Case No. S2 20 Cr. 330).
EFTA00020439.pdf
This document contains an email chain from March 2021 between defense attorney David Oscar Markus and a redacted Assistant United States Attorney regarding U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Markus introduces himself as appellate counsel for Maxwell's bail appeal and requests access to specific unredacted docket entries. The government confirms its opposition to the bail motion and notes that a protective order (ECF No. 36) is already in place.
EFTA00020437.pdf
This document is an email correspondence between attorney David Oscar Markus and Assistant United States Attorneys regarding United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Markus informs the government of his representation of Maxwell in her bail appeal and requests access to specific unredacted docket entries, while the government responds regarding document availability and existing protective orders.
EFTA00018026.pdf
This document is an email thread from July 30, 2021, relating to the case United States v. Maxwell (20-Cr-330). Attorney David Oscar Markus emailed Judge Nathan's chambers to submit a responsive letter regarding a government filing from June 30, 2021, explaining that he lacked filing privileges in the SDNY. Judge Nathan's chambers replied with an attached order.
EFTA00015825.pdf
This document is an email chain between David Oscar Markus, representing Ghislaine Maxwell, and the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) regarding her appeal of a bail denial. The correspondence, dating from March 25 to April 10, 2021, covers Markus's request for unredacted docket entries, discussions on expediting the appeal process, and the filing of an unredacted Exhibit F under seal. The US Attorney confirms the existence of a protective order and agrees not to oppose expediting consideration of the appeal, provided the 10-day response window remains intact.
EFTA00015723.pdf
This document is a Notice of Docket Activity from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit regarding the case United States v. Maxwell (Case No. 21-770), dated April 5, 2021. It notifies attorneys of record, including David Oscar Markus and Bobbi C. Sternheim, that a 'Defective Document' (Acknowledgment and Notice of Appearance) was filed on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell. The document includes standard PACER warnings and technical metadata regarding the file transaction.
EFTA00015720.pdf
This document is an automated Notice of Docket Activity from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, dated April 5, 2021. It confirms the filing of an 'Acknowledgment and Notice of Appearance' on behalf of appellant Ghislaine Maxwell in case 21-770 (United States of America v. Maxwell). The notice lists attorney David Oscar Markus as a recipient, indicating he is representing Maxwell in this appeal.
EFTA00009879.pdf
This document is an email thread from April 19, 2021, among staff at the US Attorney's Office (USANYS) forwarding a Notice of Docket Activity from the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. The notice confirms the filing of a 'Reply to Opposition' regarding Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for pretrial release (bail) in the case United States of America v. Maxwell (Case 21-770).
DOJ-OGR-00000255.tif
This document is the conclusion section of a legal filing, likely a petition for certiorari, dated July 28, 2025. It argues that the case provides an ideal opportunity for the Court to resolve a split regarding federal plea bargains, particularly in the context of federal prosecution related to "Epstein's circle." The document is submitted by DAVID OSCAR MARKUS and MONA MARKUS of MARKUS/MOSS PLLC.
DOJ-OGR-00000218.tif
This document lists contact information for two law firms, Kropf Moseley Schmitt PLLC and Markus/Moss PLLC, and their respective attorneys, Sara Kropf and David Oscar Markus, under a case reference '24-1073 MAXWELL, GHISLAINE USA'. It appears to be a record of legal counsel contact details relevant to Ghislaine Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00000061.tif
This document, dated April 10, 2025, is a legal filing arguing for the granting of a petition for certiorari. It highlights a legal dispute regarding the enforceability of a government promise not to prosecute Epstein's co-conspirators, specifically mentioning Ghislaine Maxwell's prosecution despite such a promise. David Oscar Markus, Counsel of Record from MARKUS/MOSS PLLC, is representing the petitioner.
DOJ-OGR-00000034.tif
This document is a Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed with the Supreme Court of the United States by Ghislaine Maxwell, also identified as SEALED DEFENDANT 1, against the United States of America. Dated April 10, 2025, it seeks review of a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, with David Oscar Markus of MARKUS/Moss PLLC serving as counsel for Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00015095.jpg
This is the conclusion page of a legal document (Document 803) filed on August 5, 2025, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The filing, submitted by the law firm MARKUS/MOSS PLLC and signed by attorney David Oscar Markus, argues that the government's motion to unseal grand jury materials should be denied. The document also lists attorney Melissa Madrigal and provides contact information for the firm.
No Subject
dmarkus@markuslaw.com
No Subject
Phone number for Markus/Moss PLLC: 305-379-6667
No Subject
Email address for David Oscar Markus: DMARKUS@MARKUSLAW.COM
No Subject
Phone: (305) 379-6667, Email: dmarkus@markuslaw.com
Service of Amicus Brief
Service of three copies of Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Petitioner via Priority Mail.
Response of David Oscar Markus in United States v. Maxwel...
Markus submitting a responsive letter to the court via email because he lacks filing privileges in SDNY. He requests it be filed on the public docket.
Re: Response of David Oscar Markus in United States v. Ma...
Chambers sending an attached order (20cr330_Order_7.30.21.pdf) in response to Markus's email.
Response to Government Request
States he does not represent Maxwell currently and his Op-Ed did not violate local rules.
Denial of Government's Request
A letter arguing the Government's request should be denied because Markus does not currently represent Maxwell and his op-ed did not violate local rules.
Response to Government's request
A letter arguing the government's request should be denied because the undersigned counsel does not represent Ms. Maxwell and the Op-Ed did not violate local rules.
Certificate of Service for a legal document
David Oscar Markus certifies that a true and correct copy of a foregoing document was e-filed on May 17, 2021.
Filing of Petition
Certification that the document was e-filed on this date.
2nd Circuit
Notifying opposing counsel of intent to file a renewed motion for bond in the Second Circuit based on a Friday ruling.
Certificate of Service for a legal document
David Oscar Markus certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was e-filed on April 19, 2021.
Re: U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell
Asks if government will file other pleadings unredacted as well, stating the court should have them all.
Re: U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell
Intention to submit motion to file unredacted copy of Exhibit F under seal. Asks for consent.
Re: U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell
No objection.
E-filing of legal petition
I CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was e-filed this 1st day of April, 2021.
Motion for Pretrial Release
Motion Information Statement filing requesting bail or evidentiary hearing.
Re: U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell
Asks for government's position on expediting the appeal.
Re: U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell
Replies 'Both'.
Re: U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell
States they do not oppose expediting consideration but DO oppose shortening the ten days to respond.
Re: U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell
Agrees not to ask to shorten the 10 days if government doesn't ask for extension.
Notice of Appearance for Ghislaine Maxwell
This document is a formal notice filed with the court by attorney David Oscar Markus to state that he is now representing Ghislaine Maxwell as additional counsel in case 21-770/21-58.
Certificate of Service
Certification that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was e-filed.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity