Email headers:

*   From: (USANYS)
*   To: (NY) (FBI), (USANYS), (NYPD) , (USANYS)

Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - RE: Ghislaine Maxwell Triggerfish

Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:05:19 +0000

Thanks very much to you both.

- Document: email thread screenshot with extensive redactions.
- Subject: "[EXTERNAL EMAIL] - RE: [REDACTED] Triggerfish" (person-name redacted in image).
- Dates/times: Dec 28, 2020 — 10:58 AM; 12:04 PM; 1:57 PM.
- Participants (affiliations visible): FBI (New York Field Office), U.S. Attorney’s Office (USANYS), NYPD; individual names and email addresses largely redacted.
- Message fragments visible: "I agree"; "I agree, thanks".
- Signature visible: "Special Agent [REDACTED], FBI New York Field Office".
- Other: multiple header lines and recipient blocks are redacted; image implies warrant materials are attached (from surrounding context).

See below. I do not think we can justify seeking extended sealing at this point, but let me know if you all disagree. The warrant materials are attached for reference.

| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| From | [REDACTED] (USANH) |
| Sent | Wednesday, December 23, 2020 2:42 PM |
| To | [REDACTED] (USANYS) <[REDACTED]> |
| Cc | [REDACTED] (USANH) <[REDACTED]> |
| Subject | FW: [REDACTED] Triggerfish |

Notes: Multiple names/addresses are redacted; organization tags "USANH" and "USANYS" are visible.

a, do you need the seal on the DNH triggerfish warrant extended?

Merry Christmas to you and yours!

Mr.

From: <empty> (USANH) <empty>
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2020 10:20 AM
To: <empty> (USANH) <empty>
Subject: Ghislaine Maxwell Triggerfish

EFTA00015880

The seal on this triggerfish is set to expire soon.

Am I correct in assuming we can go ahead and let this lapse?

EFTA00015881