DOJ-OGR-00019422.jpg

Case 20-3061, Document 60, 09/24/2020, 2938278, Page23 of 58 Government’s methods of obtaining evidence that it intends to use to prosecute the criminal case through the Subpoenas to” MI Doc. 37, p 17. Based on this understanding, the government claims that Ms. Maxwell “seeks to have this Court reach the merits of her arguments on that issue in the context of the czvzl appeal, and before they have been properly litigated before and adjudicated by the District Court in the criminal case.” Doc. 37, p 17 (emphasis in original). That is not so. In the civil appeal, Ms. Maxwell is not asking this Court to rule on the propriety of the government’s conduct in circumventing Martindell and obtaining her depositions in a secret ex parte proceeding without providing Ms. Maxwell notice and an opportunity to be heard. Rather, Ms. Maxwell’s argument in the civil appeal is that, unless this Court reverses Judge Preska’s order unsealing the deposition material, Ms. Maxwell may never be able to challenge before Judge Nathan the government’s conduct in obtaining her depositions. As Ms. Maxwell said in her opening brief in the appeal of Judge Preska’s unsealing order: The civil case is not the appropriate forum to litigate the government’s apparent violation of Martindell. Ms. Maxwell intends to make that argument to Judge Nathan in the criminal case. But if Judge Preska’s unsealing order is affirmed and Ms. Maxwell’s deposition is released, her ability to make that argument before Judge Nathan will be prejudiced. Keeping the deposition material sealed will 18 DOJ-OGR-00019422