Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch1_p00598.png

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1320-28 Filed 01/03/24 Page 5 of 32 allegations about Ghislaine Maxwell are — or rather are not — true. The attempted service of subpoenas on Epstein, Kellen and Marcincova all violated Rule 45(a)(4) and should be sanctioned by this Court. As to all of these witnesses, Plaintiff has fallen far short of the “good cause” required by Rule 16(b)(4) to modify the Scheduling Order. In fact, for the most part, her failures to actively pursue depositions with these witnesses qualifies as in-excusable neglect: She frittered away seven of the eight months of the discovery period and now has placed Ms. Maxwell, this Court, and the witnesses in the untenable position of trying to accommodate her last-minute scramble. In the absence of any acceptable excuses, and for the limited evidentiary value that most of the requested witnesses can provide, this Court should deny the request for the extra time to take these six depositions. The only witnesses for whom depositions should be permitted following the discovery cut-off are: (1) Ms. Sharon Churcher, Plaintiffs friend, advocate and former journalist with the Daily Mail, who filed a Motion to Quash her subpoena on the day before her scheduled deposition,” and (2) Plaintiff, who refused to answer questions at her deposition concerning highly relevant, non-privileged information.’ Alternatively, if the Court is to grant additional time for Plaintiff to take depositions, Ms. Maxwell will be unduly prejudiced without sufficient additional time to (a) secure any witnesses to rebut testimony gleaned from these witnesses, (b) conduct discovery of Plaintiff's retained experts, (c) submit a summary judgment motion which includes facts learned from these late depositions, and (d) prepare for trial. Thus, if the Court grants Plaintiff's motion, the remaining deadlines in the Scheduling Order ought to be extended accordingly. > Ms. Churcher’s motion to quash will be heard this Thursday by the Court. 3 Ms. Maxwell is filing simultaneously with this Response a Motion to Re-Open Plaintiff's Deposition. 2