EFTA00212542Set 9
2008-01-099p6,038w
Korean Air Lines, Ltd., 505 F.Supp.2d
91 (D.D.C.2007), injunction pending appeal denied (D.C.Cir. Aug. 24, 2007) (No. 07-3091), and held that there
was no violation of either grand ... ever, be granted. See SEC
v. Loving Spirit Found., 392 F.3d 486, 494 (D.C.Cir.2004) ('i,j[J]udicial rulings ... virtually never provide
a basis for recusal. Indeed, we have ... ground alone.
See Trudeau v. Federal Trade Commit, 456 F.3d 178, 182 n. 2 (D.C.Cir.2006).
DISCUSSION
[3] Rule 6(e)(2) provides that an attorney for the government %must
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00212542.pdf
EFTA00209657Set 9
2013-08-0575p16,720w
Sealed Case, 716 F.3d 603 (D.C.Cir. 2013) 54
In re Six Grand Jury Witnesses, 979 F.2d 939 (2d Cir. 1992),
cert. denied sub nom. XYZ Corp. v. United States ... F.2d 90
(9th Cir. 1982) 41
United States v. Davis, 617 F.2d 677 (D.C.Cir. 1979),
cert denied sub nom. Gelestino v. United States,
445 U.S. 967 (1980) 15
United States ... Deloitte LLP, 610 F.3d 129 (D.C.Cir. 2010) 23
United States v. Edelman, 458 F.3d 791 (8th Cir. 2006) 26
United States v. Gonzalez, 669 F.3d
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00209657.pdf
EFTA01098174Set 9
2013-07-1910p2,838w
which intervention is sought." National Resources Defense Council v. Costle,
561 F.2d 904, 907 (D.C.Cir. 1977).
Mr. Epstein's motion is timely because it seeks intervention only for the limited ... Rule 6(e) disclosure prohibition. See, e.g., United States v.
Barry, 865 F.2d 1317 (D.C.Cir. 1989); United States v. Blalock, 844 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1988);
Eisenberg, supra ... Sealed Case No. 98-3077, 151 F.3d 1059, 1070 (D.C.Cir. 1998), quoting Douglas Oil Co.
of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211, 219 (1979). Mr. Epstein
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01098174.pdf
EFTA01128686Set 9
2013-07-199p2,584w
which intervention is sought." National Resources Defense Council v. Costle,
561 F.2d 904, 907 (D.C.Cir. 1977).
2
EFTA01128687
Mr. Epstein's motion is timely because it seeks intervention only ... Rule 6(e) disclosure prohibition. See, e.g., United States v.
Barry, 865 F.2d 1317 (D.C.Cir. 1989); United States v. Blalock, 844 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1988);
Eisenberg, supra ... vote against indictment.
In re Sealed Case No. 98-3077, 151 F.3d 1059, 1070 (D.C.Cir. 1998), quoting Douglas Oil Co.
of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01128686.pdf
EFTA00209264Set 9
2013-07-199p2,604w
which intervention is sought." National Resources Defense Council v. Costle,
561 F.2d 904, 907 (D.C.Cir. 1977).
Mr. Epstein's motion is timely because it seeks intervention only for the limited ... Rule 6(e) disclosure prohibition. See, e.g., United States v.
Barry, 865 F.2d 1317 (D.C.Cir. 1989); United States v. Blalock, 844 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1988);
Eisenberg, supra ... vote against indictment.
In re Sealed Case No. 98-3077, 151 F.3d 1059, 1070 (D.C.Cir. 1998), quoting Douglas Oil Co.
of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00209264.pdf
EFTA00209534Set 9
2013-07-1225p5,708w
F.3d 432 (6th Cir. 2009) 19
In re Sealed Case, F.3d 2013 WL 2120157
(D.C.Cir. March 5, 2013) 13
Lafler. Cooper, 132 S.Ct. 1376 (2012) 5
Marino I. Ortiz ... United States I Williams Cos., Inc., 562 F.3d 387 (D.C.Cir. 2009) 15
Wilson. O'Brien, 621 F.3d 641 (7th Cir. 2010) 10, 11, 15
Constitutional Provisions
Sixth Amendment, United States ... right or privilege, see In re Sealed Case, F.3d 2013 WL 2120157 at *4
(D.C.Cir. March 5, 2013)("The Perlman doctrine permits appeals from some
decisions that are not final
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00209534.pdf
EFTA01128544Set 9
2016-04-0511p2,804w
District of Columbia, United States v. Fokker Services B.V., F.3d , 2016 WL
1319266 (D.C.Cir. April 5, 2016)-,-and-principles of both constitutional law and contract law
and principles, as well ... 11th Cir. 1986); National Resources
Defense Council v. Costle, 561 F.2d 904, 907-08 (D.C.Cir. 1977); see also Calvin() v. Berry,
922 F.2d 37 (1st Cir. 1990)(district court denied ... proceedings . . ." United States v. Fokker
Services B. V., F.3d 2016 WL 1319266 at *5 (D.C.Cir. April 5, 2016), quoting Newman
v United States, 382 F.2d 479, 480 (D.C.Cir. 1967). Fokker
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01128544.pdf
EFTA01072169Set 9
2013-07-1225p5,750w
F.3d 432 (6th Cir. 2009) 19
In re Sealed Case, F.3d , 2013 WL 2120157
(D.C.Cir. March 5, 2013) 13
Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S.Ct. 1376 (2012) 5
Marino v. Ortiz ... United States v. Williams Cos., Inc., 562 F.3d 387 (D.C.Cir. 2009) 15
Wilson v. O'Brien, 621 F.3d 641 (7th Cir. 2010) 10, 11, 15
Constitutional Provisions
Sixth Amendment, United ... right or privilege, see In re Sealed Case, F.3d 2013 WL 2120157 at *4
(D.C.Cir. March 5, 2013)("The Perlman doctrine permits appeals from some
decisions that are not final
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01072169.pdf
EFTA01134321Set 9
2013-06-1858p13,086w
proof of guilt"); see
also United States v. Davis, 617 F.2d 677, 683 (D.C.Cir. 1979)("The most
significant factor in [Rule 11(e)(6)'s] adoption was the need ... some circumstances to an adversary." Williams & Connolly v.
S.E.C., 662 F.3d 1240, 1244 (D.C.Cir. 2011). Here, the government was
unquestionably Epstein's adversary in the matter of the federal criminal ... disclosed to third parties. See United
States v. Deloitte UP, 610 F.3d 129, 141 (D.C.Cir. 2010)(court "examine[s]
whether the disclosing party had a reasonable basis for believing that
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01134321.pdf
EFTA00032862Set 8
2011-02-0910p6,239w
made the requisite
preliminary showing under United States v. Kelly 790
F.2d 130, 137 (D.C.Cir.1986), the Court ordered an
evidentiary hearing on this issue. See United States v.
WEST ... Transcript at 77 (Vol. II—B); Transcript at 8 (Vol. F.2d 130, 137 (D.C.Cir.1986). While there is a
II—A). presumption that the information is conveyed to the
prosecution ... team, Briggs v. Goodwin, 698 F.2d 486, 495
(D.C.Cir.1983), vacated on other grounds, 712 F.2d 1444,
cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1040, 104 S.Ct. 704, 79 L.Ed
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%208/EFTA00032862.pdf
EFTA00209465Set 9
2013-07-1225p5,673w
F.3d 432 (6th Cir. 2009) 19
In re Sealed Case, F.3d 2013 WL 2120157
(D.C.Cir. March 5, 2013) 13
Lafler. Cooper, 132 S.Ct. 1376 (2012) 5
Marino I. Ortiz ... United States I Williams Cos., Inc., 562 F.3d 387 (D.C.Cir. 2009) 15
Wilson. O'Brien, 621 F.3d 641 (7th Cir. 2010) 10, 11, 15
Constitutional Provisions
Sixth Amendment, United States ... right or privilege, see In re Sealed Case, F.3d 2013 WL 2120157 at *4
(D.C.Cir. March 5, 2013)("The Perlman doctrine permits appeals from some
decisions that are not final
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00209465.pdf
EFTA00299022Set 9
2006-07-1953p14,386w
institute criminal proceedings . . .." United States v. Fokker Services B. Y., 818
F.3d 733, 741 (D.C.Cir. 2016), quoting Newman v United States, 382 F.2d 479, 480
(D.C.Cir. 1967).
As the Supreme ... Aiken
Cnty., 725 F.3d 255, 262-63 (D.C.Cir.2013). Decisions to initiate charges,
or to dismiss charges once brought, "lie[ ] at the core of the Executive's duty ... execution of the laws." Cmty.for Creative Non—Violence
v. Pierce, 786 F.2d 1199, 1201 (D.C.Cir.1986). The Supreme Court thus has
repeatedly emphasized that "[w]hether to prosecute and what
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00299022.pdf
EFTA00797875Set 9
1999-05-2627p11,765w
National
congressional purpose is contrary. Treasury Employees Union v. Campbell,
654 F.2d 784, 794 (D.C.Cir.1981)
These congressional responses, made (by statutory requirement that the
with knowledge of the agency ... would terminate fully Environmental Protection Agency, 167
performed contracts because of this F.3d 602 (D.C.Cir.1999), a case stressed
flawed compliance. in the dissenting opinion hereto, the
court voided ... Envtl. Protection Agency, 167 F.3d 602,
the precise purpose for which the DoD 607 (D.C.Cir.1999). 4
contracted. Surely it should not be
necessary for Congress to have added
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00797875.pdf
EFTA01098196Set 9
2016-04-2215p3,442w
District of Columbia, United States v. Fokker Services B.V.,
F.3d , 2016 WL 1319266 (D.C.Cir. April 5, 2016), principles of both
constitutional law and contract law, and doctrines of constitutional avoidance ... proceedings . . . ." United States v. Fokker Services B. V.,
F.3d , 2016 WL 1319266 at *5 (D.C.Cir. April 5, 2016), quoting Newman v
United States, 382 F.2d 479, 480 (D.C.Cir. 1967). Fokker
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01098196.pdf
EFTA00584628Set 9
2013-07-196p1,718w
which intervention is sought." National Resources Defense Council V. Costle,
561 F.2d 904, 907 (D.C.Cir. 1977).
Mr. Epstein's motion is timely because it seeks intervention only for the limited ... Rule 6(e) disclosure
prohibition. See, e.g., United States v. Barry, 865 F.2d 1317 (D.C.Cir. 1989); United States v.
Blalock, 844 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1988); Eisenberg, supra ... vote against indictment.
In re Sealed Case NO. 98-3077, 151 F.3d 1059, 1070 (D.C.Cir. 1998), quoting Douglas Oil Co.
of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00584628.pdf
EFTA00812487Set 9
2016-04-2215p3,442w
District of Columbia, United States v. Fokker Services B.V.,
F.3d , 2016 WL 1319266 (D.C.Cir. April 5, 2016), principles of both
constitutional law and contract law, and doctrines of constitutional avoidance ... proceedings . . . ." United States v. Fokker Services B. V.,
F.3d , 2016 WL 1319266 at *5 (D.C.Cir. April 5, 2016), quoting Newman v
United States, 382 F.2d 479, 480 (D.C.Cir. 1967). Fokker
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00812487.pdf
EFTA00211543Set 9
2016-04-2215p3,396w
Appeals for the District of Columbia, United States'. Fokker Services ■.,
F.3d , 2016 WL 1319266 (D.C.Cir. April 5, 2016), principles of both
constitutional law and contract law, and doctrines of constitutional ... institute criminal proceedings . . . ." United States'. Fokker Services a.
F.3d , 2016 WL 1319266 at *5 (D.C.Cir. April 5, 2016), quoting I
United States, 382 F.2d 479, 480 (D.C.Cir. 1967). Fokker Services
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00211543.pdf
EFTA01128645Set 9
2013-07-0811p3,203w
11th Cir. 1986); National Resources
Defense Council v. Costle, 561 F.2d 904, 907-08 (D.C.Cir. 1977); see also Catmint) v. Berry,
922 F.2d 37 (1st Cir. 1990)(district court denied ... criminal
proceedings .. . ." United States v. Fokker Services B.V., F.3d 2016 WL 1319266 at *5
(D.C.Cir. April 5, 2016), quoting Newman v United States, 382 F.2d 479, 480 (D.C.Cir. 1967).
Fokker
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01128645.pdf
EFTA00589566Set 9
2013-07-0811p3,198w
National Resources
Defense Council v. Costle, 561 F.2d 904, 907-08 (D.C.Cir. 1977); see also Catmint) v. Berry,
922 F.2d 37 (1st Cir. 1990)(district court denied intervention at liability ... proceedings . .
. ." United States v. Fokker Services B. V., F.3d 2016 WL 1319266 at *5 (D.C.Cir. April
5, 2016), quoting Newman v United States, 382 F.2d 479, 480 (D.C.Cir. 1967). Fokker
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00589566.pdf
EFTA01731371Set 10
2013-07-198p1,723w
which intervention is sought."National Resources Defense Council v. Costle
561 F.2d 904, 907 (D.C.Cir. 1977).
Mr. Epstein's motion is timely because it seeks intervention only for the limited ... Rule 6(e) disclosure
prohibition. See, e.g., United States v. Barry, 865 F.2d 1317 (D.C.Cir. 1989); United States it
Blalock, 844 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir. 1988); Eisenberg, supra ... EFTA01731377
In m Sealed Case NO. 98-3077, 151 F.3d 1059, 1070 (D.C.Cir. 1998),quoting Douglas Oil Co.
ofCalifornia v. Petrol Stops Northwest 441 U.S. 211, 219 (1979). Mr. Epstein
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01731371.pdf