UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
PAUL M. DAUGERDAS
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Alison Moe
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
ANDREW ROHRBACH
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Lara Pomerantz
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Adversarial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
DAMIAN WILLIAMS
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Dashawn Robertson
|
Adversarial defendant vs plaintiff |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
TOVA NOEL
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Michael Thomas
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ALEXANDER ROSSMILLER
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ALISON J. MOE
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MAURENE R. COMEY
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Todd Blanche
|
Professional employment representation |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GEOFFREY S. BERMAN
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lara Pomerantz
|
Client |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Appeal | The document pertains to an appeal (Case 20-3061) before the United States Court of Appeals for t... | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| N/A | Oral argument request | Request for oral argument in case 20-3061, with a preference for it only if another party also re... | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| N/A | Legal case | Court proceedings for the case of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL. | Southern District | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Upcoming pre-trial proceedings and trial for the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Ma... | courthouse | View |
| N/A | Legal filing | Instructions for filing a bill of costs in the case United States of America v. Maxwell, Docket #... | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| 2022-06-28 | Legal proceeding | Sentencing | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2022-06-22 | Legal deadline | Government sentencing submission due | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2022-06-06 | Legal deadline | Government response due | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2021-06-02 | Court proceeding | The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an order denying Ghislaine Maxwe... | Thurgood Marshall United St... | View |
| 2021-04-27 | Legal proceeding | The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held a term and issued an order affirmi... | Thurgood Marshall United St... | View |
| 2021-03-26 | Legal filing | Filing of a Declaration of Sigrid S. McCawley in Support of Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2021-02-04 | Pretrial conference | The Court discussed Dashawn Robertson's motion at length with the parties and the USPO. | N/A | View |
| 2020-12-02 | Deadline | Deadline for the Government to respond to the Defendant's November 25, 2020 letter request and th... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2012-02-15 | Legal proceeding | A court proceeding for the case of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL. | SOUTHERN DISTRICT | View |
DOJ-OGR-00015052.jpg
This document is a Notice of Appearance filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for case 1:20-CR-00330-PAE (USA vs. Ghislaine Maxwell). Attorney David Oscar Markus of Markus/Moss PLLC is formally entering his appearance as counsel for the defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell, certifying that he is admitted to practice Pro Hac Vice. The document is dated July 22, 2025.
DOJ-OGR-00015047.jpg
This document is a Court Order filed on July 22, 2025, by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The Judge acknowledges the Government's motion to unseal grand jury transcripts but states the Court cannot rule without a Memorandum of Law addressing the specific exceptions to Grand Jury secrecy (Rule 6(e)). A footnote notes a parallel motion was filed in the case against Jeffrey Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00015046.jpg
This document is a formal "Notice of Appearance" filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Dated July 21, 2025, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Oestericher officially notifies the court that he is representing the United States in this case. The notice requests the Clerk of Court to record his appearance and add him to the electronic notification system for all case filings.
DOJ-OGR-00015045.jpg
This is a proposed court order from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in the case of U.S. vs. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order, signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer, grants the motion for attorney David Oscar Markus of Florida to be admitted 'pro hac vice', allowing him to serve as counsel for the defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell, in this specific case.
DOJ-OGR-00015037.jpg
This legal document is a motion filed by the U.S. Department of Justice on July 18, 2025, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell in the Southern District of New York. The motion requests the court to unseal grand jury transcripts associated with the indictment, citing public interest and the importance of transparency. This action follows a July 6, 2025, memorandum from the DOJ and FBI which concluded their review of investigative holdings related to Jeffrey Epstein found no evidence to investigate uncharged third parties.
DOJ-OGR-00015036.jpg
This document is a Notice of Appearance filed on July 18, 2025, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, concerning the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Attorney Todd Blanche, a Deputy Attorney General, formally requests to appear in the case and be added as a Filing User, with electronic filings to be sent to Jordan.Fox@usdoj.gov.
DOJ-OGR-00014851.jpg
This document is the cover page for a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding case number 22-1426-cr, United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The case was argued on March 12, 2024, and decided on September 17, 2024, by Circuit Judges Cabranes, Wesley, and Lohier. The appeal originates from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
DOJ-OGR-00014850.jpg
This legal document is a mandate from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, filed and issued on December 2, 2024. The court, after hearing the appeal, affirms the June 29, 2022, judgment of conviction against Defendant-Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
DOJ-OGR-00008552.jpg
This document is page 14 of 167 from a court filing (Document 563) dated December 18, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It contains Jury Instruction No. 6, titled 'All Parties Are Equal Before the Law,' which instructs the jury to perform their duties without bias and to treat the United States Government and the defense as equals in the litigation.
DOJ-OGR-00008537.jpg
This document is a draft verdict sheet from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, dated December 17, 2021, for the criminal case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The sheet outlines three counts for the jury to render a verdict on: Conspiracy to Entice an Individual, Enticement of an Individual (Jane), and Conspiracy to Transport a Minor, all related to traveling for illegal sexual activity. The case is presided over by the Honorable Alison J. Nathan.
DOJ-OGR-00008468.jpg
This document is a page from a set of jury instructions filed in a federal criminal case on December 17, 2021. Instruction No. 6 directs the jury to treat all parties, including the United States Government, equally and without bias or prejudice. The core message is that the government's status as the prosecutor does not entitle it to any special consideration compared to other parties in the litigation.
DOJ-OGR-00008458.jpg
This document is the cover page for a 'Draft Jury Charge' filed on December 17, 2021, in the criminal case of the United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case S2 20 Cr. 330). It was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and bears a Department of Justice footer stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00008457.jpg
This document is a court order filed on December 17, 2021, by District Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order attaches a draft jury charge and verdict sheet and instructs counsel to be prepared to provide suggestions for changes at a charging conference scheduled for the following day, December 18, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00008422.jpg
This is a court order from Judge Alison J. Nathan dated December 16, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The judge orders the parties to submit letters by 10:15 p.m. that same day citing legal authority regarding the admission of prior inconsistent statements and the application of Rule 613(b). The parties are also ordered to docket these letters by the following morning.
DOJ-OGR-00008363.jpg
This document is a court order issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan on December 14, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order directs the Government to respond to a letter from the Defense regarding witnesses by 10:00 p.m. that day. It also orders the Defense to provide its anticipated witness order to the Court by 12:00 p.m. the same day.
DOJ-OGR-00008311.jpg
This document is the cover page for a court hearing transcript from the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell in the Southern District of New York. The hearing took place on November 23, 2021, before District Judge Alison J. Nathan. The page lists the appearances of the legal counsel for both the prosecution, led by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams, and the defense team for Ms. Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00008264.jpg
This is a court order from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, dated December 8, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order, issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan, directs Juror Number 70 to submit receipts for transportation costs to the Jury Administrator. It further instructs the Clerk of Court to reimburse the juror for these expenses upon receiving the receipts.
DOJ-OGR-00008263.jpg
This is a Notice of Filing of Official Transcript filed on December 8, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (20 Cr 330). The notice, signed by Court Reporter Rebecca Forman, informs parties that the transcript for a conference held on November 11, 2021, has been filed and outlines the timeline and rules for requesting redactions of personal data.
DOJ-OGR-00008236.jpg
This is a court order issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell on December 5, 2021. The order addresses a motion from the Government concerning the testimony of 'Witness-3' and compels both the Government and the Defense to submit letters to the court on the same day with specific deadlines. The order also reminds the parties to be mindful of sealing requirements under Rule 412.
DOJ-OGR-00001878.jpg
This document is the cover page for the court transcript of an arraignment and bail hearing for Ghislaine Maxwell, held via teleconference on July 14, 2020. The case, United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell, was heard in the Southern District of New York before District Judge Alison J. Nathan. The page lists the legal counsel appearing for both the prosecution, led by U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss, and the defense, represented by attorneys from the law firms Cohen & Gresser, LLP and Haddon Morgan & Foreman, P.C.
DOJ-OGR-00001847.jpg
This is a court order filed on December 3, 2020, by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order addresses a request by Maxwell's defense counsel to seal letters related to a renewed motion for bail. The court approves the defense's proposed redactions, noting that the Government does not oppose them, based on legal standards regarding judicial documents and privacy interests.
DOJ-OGR-00001841.jpg
This is a court order from Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on December 1, 2020, in the Southern District of New York. The order compels the Government to respond by December 2, 2020, to two letter requests filed by the Defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell, on November 25 and November 30, which concern proposed redactions. The judge orders that the letters remain temporarily sealed pending the court's decision on the redaction request.
DOJ-OGR-00001778.jpg
This document is a Notice of Appearance filed on October 5, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim formally notifies the court that she will be serving as legal counsel for the defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00001769.jpg
This document is a Notice of Appeal filed on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell in the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Dated September 3, 2020, it formally notifies the court of her intent to appeal the district court's September 2, 2020 decision, which denied her motion to modify a protective order. The appeal is directed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
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.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity