DOJ-OGR-00019639.jpg

Case 20-3061, Document 82, 10/02/2020, 2944267, Page32 of 37 26 make these arguments to Judge Preska and Judge Na- than before it’s too late.” (Br. 27-28). To the extent Maxwell seeks to challenge the manner in which the Government obtained the materials at issue—a chal- lenge that itself would not justify the relief presently requested—Maxwell can make such arguments before Judge Nathan, and the Government can and will vig- orously oppose them, at the appropriate stage in the case. If anything, this appeal appears to be a thinly veiled attempt to have this Court weigh in on the Gov- ernment’s investigative methods. Her briefing is filled with accusations of impropriety on the part of the Gov- ernment but with virtually no explanation of how that supposed impropriety relates to any civil case. It ap- pears that Maxwell would like this Court to agree that the Government illegally obtained evidence before the issue has even been briefed before Judge Nathan. This Court’s precedents do not countenance such efforts to bypass district courts. See, e.g., Frontera Res. Azer. Corp. v. State Oil Co. of the Azer. Republic, 582 F.3d 393, 401 (2d Cir. 2009) (because issue “ha[d] not been decided” by district court, “it would be premature for us to address this question without hearing first from the court below”). Maxwell presents no sound reason to deviate from precedent here, nor is one readily ap- parent. Maxwell is fully capable of litigating any sup- pression motions in the District Court, and will have an opportunity to do so. Maxwell suggests that the “very point of this ap- peal” is to share information with Judge Preska under seal. (Br. 11). She asks that this Court permit her to DOJ-OGR-00019639