DOJ-OGR-00019521.jpg

Casedl ADAH SROs Aden (ide WH Eit/ 362 CF iRAB62A18/Peg Raxyef7l 867 The Honorable Alison J. Nathan July 28, 2020 Page 7 of such materials provided by the defendant to the Government. But there is no basis to add additional restrictions upon the Government’s use of materials gathered by the Government itself. The defendant’s only counter-argument, as noted—that this Court should put third parties “on equal footing with the defense’”—is both unlikely to be relevant given the Government’s standard practice, as described above, and, the Government submits, an irrelevant consideration in the context of a criminal protective order. Indeed, the Government respectfully submits that neither it nor this Court is well-positioned to, or should, become the arbiter of what is appropriate or permissible in civil cases. In sum, the defendant’s attempt to restrict the Government and to restrict third parties in this way appears to be unprecedented, and is without legal basis, and should be denied. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, the Court should enter the Government’s proposed protective order, which is enclosed, and deny the defendant’s motion. Respectfully submitted, AUDREY STRAUSS Acting United States Attorney By: Alex Rossmiller / Alison Moe / Maurene Comey Assistant United States Attorneys Southern District of New York Tel: (212) 637-2415 Ce: — All counsel of record (via ECF) App.062 DOJ-OGR-00019521