Second Circuit
LocationRelationship Network
EFTA00031331.pdf
This document is a digital calendar entry detailing an event titled 'Accepted: Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit' scheduled for February 6, 2019, from 15:00 to 17:00 UTC. The record was created on January 9, 2019, and is classified as 'X-PERSONAL'. The identity of the organizer is redacted.
EFTA00031330.pdf
This document is an email notification dated January 9, 2019, indicating that an individual from the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS) accepted a calendar invitation for an event titled 'Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit'. The identities of the sender and recipient are redacted.
EFTA00029469.pdf
This document is an electronic calendar record for an event titled 'Accepted: Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit' scheduled for March 6, 2019, from 15:00 to 17:00 UTC. The record was created on February 5, 2019, and is classified as 'X-PERSONAL'. The organizer's identity has been redacted.
EFTA00019517.pdf
This document is a digital calendar entry for an event titled 'Epstein Oral Argument-- Second Circuit' scheduled for February 6, 2019. The event was created on January 9, 2019, and includes attendees from 'USANYS' (United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York), though specific names are redacted.
EFTA00018504.pdf
This document is an email dated October 8, 2020, likely from the U.S. Attorney's Office, summarizing upcoming oral arguments before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. It highlights the case 'United States v. Maxwell' (referring to Ghislaine Maxwell), scheduled for October 13, 2020, concerning an appeal regarding a protective order. The email also lists arguments for 'Farhane v. United States' and 'United States v. Louis McIntosh'.
DOJ-OGR-00000036.tif
This document outlines the parties and related legal proceedings concerning Ghislaine Maxwell. It identifies Ghislaine Maxwell as the Petitioner, Defendant, and Appellant, with the United States as the Respondent, and references two specific court cases: United States v. Maxwell in the Second Circuit (2024) and United States v. Maxwell in the S.D.N.Y. (2021).
DOJ-OGR-00001245.jpg
This legal document is a filing, likely by the government, arguing that the district court should deny the defendant's 'Third Bail Motion'. The primary argument is that the court lacks jurisdiction because the defendant has a simultaneous bail appeal pending in the Second Circuit. A secondary argument is that even if jurisdiction existed, the motion should be denied because the court has already twice found the defendant to be a flight risk.
DOJ-OGR-00000942.jpg
This document is the cover page for a legal filing dated April 1, 2021, submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. It is an appendix to a motion for pretrial release for the appellant, Ghislaine Maxwell, in her appeal against the United States of America. The filing was prepared by attorney David Oscar Markus of the law firm MARKUS/MOSS PLLC.
DOJ-OGR-00000912.jpg
This document is the cover page for a legal filing, specifically 'Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell's Motion for Pretrial Release', submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on April 1, 2021. The motion is part of an appeal from a case in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, in the matter of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The filing was made by attorney David Oscar Markus of the Miami-based law firm MARKUS/MOSS PLLC.
DOJ-OGR-00021086.jpg
This document is a page from an appellate legal brief (Case 22-1426) arguing that the District Court erred in applying the 'Annabi' legal precedent to the Appellant's case. The text argues that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) originated outside the Second Circuit and should not be subject to its specific legal canons, and further argues that the conduct charged in Count Six falls within the time period covered by the original NPA. The document specifically challenges the USAO-SDNY's charges relative to the 2001-2007 offense period.
DOJ-OGR-00021049.jpg
This document is the Table of Contents (page i) for an appellate brief filed on February 28, 2023, in Case 22-1426. It outlines legal arguments asserting that the 'Appellant' (contextually Ghislaine Maxwell) should have all counts dismissed based on the Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), claiming status as a third-party beneficiary and arguing that the USAO-SDNY is bound by the 'potential co-conspirators' provision.
DOJ-OGR-00021048.jpg
This document is the cover page of a legal filing, specifically a 'BRIEF AND SPECIAL APPENDIX FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT', submitted to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on February 28, 2023. The filing is for the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 22-1426-cr), where Maxwell is the Defendant-Appellant. The document lists her legal representation from the law firm Aidala, Bertuna & Kamins PC.
DOJ-OGR-00020668.jpg
This document is a page from the SDNY court docket for the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 22-1426) covering June 2021. It details the denial of Maxwell's bail appeal by the Second Circuit, her complaints regarding sleep deprivation at the MDC, and the denial of her motions to suppress evidence. It also orders the unsealing of documents related to the civil case Giuffre v. Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00020637.jpg
This document is a page from the docket report for the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering filings between October 20, 2020, and November 18, 2020. It details procedural exchanges including letters between the prosecution (AUSAs Comey, Moe, Pomerantz) and the defense (Pagliuca), orders regarding Brady disclosure obligations, and a mandate from the Second Circuit dismissing an appeal. The document also includes Judge Nathan's endorsements extending discovery deadlines and addressing requests to delay the disclosure of certain materials.
DOJ-OGR-00020595.jpg
This legal document, dated July 15, 2022, is a notice from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the case of "United States of America v. Maxwell" (Docket # 22-1426). The notice states that the case manager assigned to the matter has been changed. It provides a phone number for any inquiries related to the case.
DOJ-OGR-00020528.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet covering the period from May 25, 2021, to June 15, 2021, detailing legal proceedings in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It includes orders setting trial disclosure schedules (including victim identities and Jencks Act material), a denial of a subpoena motion, and a mandate from the US Court of Appeals affirming the denial of Maxwell's bail and addressing complaints about sleep deprivation in custody. The document also references correspondence between defense attorneys (Everdell, Sternheim) and Judge Nathan regarding pretrial motions and confinement conditions at the MDC.
DOJ-OGR-00020400.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from late 2020 detailing procedural filings in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It logs correspondence between the Prosecution (USA) and Defense regarding discovery deadlines, disclosure delays, and investigative files, presided over by Judge Alison J. Nathan. Key events include the dismissal of an appeal by the USCA and the extension of discovery and motion deadlines into early 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00002363(1).jpg
This document is a legal argument from a court filing requesting the suppression of evidence and dismissal of certain counts. The argument centers on the crucial role of protective orders in civil litigation, citing legal precedents to assert that these orders encourage full disclosure and must be strictly enforced. The filing applies this principle to the "Maxwell depositions," which it characterizes as highly intrusive, to argue against the use of evidence derived from them.
DOJ-OGR-00021894.jpg
This document is a legal opinion discussing the District Court's denial of Maxwell's motion for a new trial. Maxwell argued she was deprived of a fair trial because Juror 50 failed to disclose a history of sexual abuse during jury selection. The document reviews the standard for abuse of discretion in denying such motions, emphasizing that new trials are granted sparingly and only under extraordinary circumstances.
DOJ-OGR-00021843.jpg
This legal document argues for limiting the application of the 'Annabi' doctrine. It contends that this doctrine, from the Second Circuit, should not apply to a plea agreement originating in the Eleventh Circuit, where precedent dictates that ambiguities are resolved against the government. The document also asserts that the Annabi doctrine should only be applied when new charges are 'sufficiently distinct' from the original ones.
DOJ-OGR-00021825.jpg
This document is the cover page for a legal filing, specifically a 'PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC', submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on November 1, 2024. The petition is filed by attorneys Arthur L. Aidala and Diana Fabi Samson on behalf of their client, Defendant-Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell, in the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The case is an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
DOJ-OGR-00021759.jpg
This legal filing argues that the District Court erred by failing to hold an evidentiary hearing on the scope of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) involving Ms. Maxwell. The author contends the court ignored key evidence from the OPR and improperly applied a rule of construction, ultimately failing to resolve ambiguities in the agreement in favor of Ms. Maxwell as required by law. The document cites precedent from the Second Circuit to support the necessity of such a hearing.
DOJ-OGR-00019592.jpg
This document is the cover page of a legal filing from September 28, 2020, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 20-3061) before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The filing is Ghislaine Maxwell's response to the government's motion to dismiss her appeal, submitted by her attorneys Ty Gee and Adam Mueller of the law firm Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. The appeal originates from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
DOJ-OGR-00019441.jpg
This legal document is a court order denying a defendant's request to modify a previously established protective order. The defendant sought permission to use discovery materials, provided by the Government for a criminal case, in a separate civil proceeding. The court references the original protective order from July 30, 2020, which both parties had agreed to and which explicitly forbade such use, and ultimately denies the defendant's request.
DOJ-OGR-00019329.jpg
This legal document is a court order denying a defendant's request to modify a protective order. The court notes that on July 30, 2020, it entered a protective order, which both the defendant and the government had agreed to, stipulating that discovery materials could only be used for the defense of the current criminal case. The defendant's subsequent request to use these materials for other purposes is denied, with the court referencing the prior agreement and legal standards.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity