HADDON
HADDON MORGAN FOREMAN April 19, 2021 The Hon. Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Judge Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, r.0 Laura A. Menninger ISO East 10th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80203 PH 303.831.7364 EX 303.832.2628 www.hmflaw.com LMenninger@hmflaw.com Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Redactions to Pleadings Re: Rule 17 Subpoenas Dear Judge Nathan: Counsel for Ms. Maxwell has conferred with Boies Schiller & Flexner (BSF) concerning any proposed redactions to the pleadings addressing the Rule 17(c) subpoena sub judice, specifically Defendant's Response of April 2 and BSF's Reply of April 5, both of which were submitted to the Court via email in order to allow an opportunity to address any necessary redactions. Ms. Maxwell is mindful of the Court's previous directive that any proposed redactions must be specifically justified and tailored yet is obligated by the Pro
Summary
HADDON MORGAN FOREMAN April 19, 2021 The Hon. Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Judge Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, r.0 Laura A. Menninger ISO East 10th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80203 PH 303.831.7364 EX 303.832.2628 www.hmflaw.com LMenninger@hmflaw.com Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Redactions to Pleadings Re: Rule 17 Subpoenas Dear Judge Nathan: Counsel for Ms. Maxwell has conferred with Boies Schiller & Flexner (BSF) concerning any proposed redactions to the pleadings addressing the Rule 17(c) subpoena sub judice, specifically Defendant's Response of April 2 and BSF's Reply of April 5, both of which were submitted to the Court via email in order to allow an opportunity to address any necessary redactions. Ms. Maxwell is mindful of the Court's previous directive that any proposed redactions must be specifically justified and tailored yet is obligated by the Pro
Persons Referenced (1)
Tags
Ask AI About This Document
Extracted Text (OCR)
Technical Artifacts (5)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
www.hmflaw.comlmenninger@hmflaw.com303.831.7364303.832.2628referencesRelated Documents (6)
Maxwell Disputes
Case 18-2868, Document 284, 08/09/2019, 2628244, Page1 of 38 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------X Plaintiff, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. -------------------------------------------------- ............................................. VIRGINIA L. GIUFFRE, 15-cv-07433-RWS Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Statement of Contested Facts and Plaintiff’s “Undisputed Facts” Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 56.1 Laura A. M
EFTA00014671
EFTA00021941
EFTA00015186
EFTA00011452
EFTA00028257
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.