DOJ-OGR-00019317.jpg
Extracted Text (OCR)
Case £49% 901 6495..Reosuntent PoAHneH2 920, ARPSS/Le720ePAGé 1 of 3
BSF
David Boies
Telephone: (914) 749-8200
Email: dboies@bsfllp.com
May 18, 2020
VIA ECF
The Honorable Debra C. Freeman
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
United States Courthouse
500 Pearl St.
New York, NY 10007-1312
Re: Annie Farmer v. Darren K. Indyke, Richard D. Kahn, & Ghislaine Maxwell,
19-10475-LGS-DCF
Dear Judge Freeman:
Pursuant to Individual Rule I.D, Plaintiff Annie Farmer hereby responds to Defendant
Ghislaine Maxwell’s request for a pre-motion conference in connection with her anticipated
motion to stay discovery in this matter. The Court should deny Maxwell’s motion for a pre-motion
conference and deny her anticipated motion in its entirety because, as explained below, each of
Maxwell’s reasons for staying discovery is meritless and the motion is simply another attempt to
unjustifiably delay this litigation.
First, a pending criminal investigation of Maxwell does not justify a stay of discovery.
“TA] stay of a civil case to permit conclusion of a related criminal prosecution has been
characterized as an extraordinary remedy.” Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. LY USA, Inc., 676 F.3d
83, 98 (2d Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks omitted). In this Circuit, courts balance the
following six factors when considering whether to stay a civil case pending related criminal
proceedings:
1) the extent to which the issues in the criminal case overlap with those presented
in the civil case; 2) the status of the case, including whether the defendants have
been indicted; 3) the private interests of the plaintiffs in proceeding expeditiously
weighed against the prejudice to plaintiffs caused by the delay; 4) the private
interests of and burden on the defendants; 5) the interests of the courts; and 6) the
public interest.
Id. at 99. And according to the very case Maxwell cites in support of staying this action pending
a criminal investigation: “The weight of authority in this Circuit indicates that courts will stay a
civil proceeding when the criminal investigation has ripened into an indictment, but will deny a
stay of the civil proceeding where no indictment has issued.” In re Par Pharm., Inc. Sec. Litig.,
133 F.R.D. 12, 13-14 (S.D.N.Y. 1990) (emphasis added) (internal citations omitted). The Court
should deny Maxwell’s motion for a stay without prejudice to her ability to renew her application
if she is arrested. Until that happens, however, there are no grounds for a stay.
DOJ-OGR-00019317
Extracted Information
Dates
Email Addresses
Phone Numbers
Document Details
| Filename | DOJ-OGR-00019317.jpg |
| File Size | 873.3 KB |
| OCR Confidence | 94.6% |
| Has Readable Text | Yes |
| Text Length | 2,504 characters |
| Indexed | 2026-02-03 19:42:06.410314 |