From: (USANYS)"
To: |(USANYS)" ·
CC: (USANYS)"
Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:58:13 +0000
Attachments: 2019-02-28, JE,_letter_re_all_writs_act_application,_15_Civ_7433_(RWS).pdf; 2019-02-
28, JE,_letter_re_all_writs_act_application,_17_Civ_0616_(SN).pdf

Pottinger was a lawyer at Boies Schiller who represented

, the plaintiff in the civil action.

The two letters we submitted in connection with our All Writs Application are attached.

From: |(USANYS)<
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 11:53 AM
To: |(USANYS)<
Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing

Another Q: who's Stan Pottinger?

From: (USANYS)<
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 10:53 AM
To: |(USANYS)<
Cc: |(USANYS)<
Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing

From: |(USANYS)
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 10:40 AM
To: |(USANYS) <
Cc: |(USANYS)<
Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing

Can I see our original application to Judge Sweet? And I assume there was no transcript before Judge S?

From: |(USANYS)<
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 5:45 PM
To: |(USANYS) <|
Cc: (USANYS)< |(USANYS)<
Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing

In the spirit of completeness, I'm also attaching their replies.

From: |(USANYS)<
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 5:20 PM
To: |(USANYS)<
Cc: |(USANYS)< (USANYS)<
Subject: Re: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing

EFTA00033882

Goodness!

Associate U.S. Attorney
Southern District of New York

On Jun 15, 2021, at 5:06 PM, (USANYS)< wrote:

She filed 12 (!!) separate MOLS as a way to evade the Court's page limits. Defense attorneys have started doing that over the last few years.

From: |(USANYS)<
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 4:25 PM
To: (USANYS)<
Cc: |(USANYS) < |(USANYS) <
Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing

Dumb Q: why does Maxwell have two memos of law?

From: (USANYS)<
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 2:19 PM
To: (USANYS)<
Cc: |(USANYS)< (USANYS)<
Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing

Per our discussion, I am attaching: (1) Maxwell's two briefs raising the suppression argument; (2) the transcript of the McMahon proceedings and her opinion (Ex D, E, G); (3) our brief (see pp 59-115); and (4) the exhibits we attached to our motion (Ex 4-7). Judge Nathan has said that she will resolve the suppression motions "at a later time" ahead of trial. Thanks very much.

From: | (USANYS) <|
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 10:09 AM
To: (USANYS)<
Cc: (USANYS)< (USANYS)<
Subject: RE: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing

Sure, set a time other than 2:00. I'm in the office. Or Webex

From: (USANYS)<
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 9:11 AM
To: (USANYS)<
Cc: (USANYS)< |(USANYS)<
Subject: Question re AJN/Maxwell Suppression Hearing

Hi

EFTA00033883

We had an issue come up related to the upcoming suppression hearing (no date set yet, although we expect one) related to Rossmiller/Kramer that we'd like your thoughts on. Let us know a convenient time to stop by over the next few days, thanks.

Chief, Public Corruption Unit
U.S. Attorney's Office
Southern District of New York

EFTA00033884