Trump v. United States of America
Filing
1
COMPLAINT/Motion for Judicial Oversight and Additional Relief against United States of America. Filing fees $ 402.00, filed by Donald J. Trump. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Text of Proposed Order)(jas)
Q!
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 1 of 27
U M TED STATES DISTRIC T CO URT
SO U TH ERN DISTW CT OF FLO RIDA
CA SE N O . 22-cv-81294-AMC
In the M atterofthe Search of
M ar-a-Lago
1100 S.Ocean Blvd.
Palm Beach,FL 33480
/
M OTIO N FOR JUDICIA L O W RSIGH T AND AD DITION AL RELIEF
PresidentDonaldJ.TntmptEtM ovm1t'D,throughhistmdersignedcotmsel,respectfullyfiles
thisMotionForJudicialOversightAndAdditionalRelief,whichseeksan orderthat:(a)appoints
aSpecialM aster;(b)enjoinsfurtherreview ofseizedmatekialsbytheGovemmentuntilaSpecial
M asterisappointed;(c)requirestheGovemmenttoprovideamoredetailedReceiptforProperty;
and (d)requirestheGovemmenttorettu'
n any item seizedthatwasnotwithin thescopeofthe
Search W arrant,and statesasfollows:
1.
.IN TR ODU CTIO N
Politicscnnnotbe allowed to impactthe administration ofjustice.PresidentDonald J.
Tnlm p is the clear frontrunner in the 2024 Republican Presidential Prim ary and in the 2024
G eneralElection,should he decide to 1-tm .1Beyond that, his endorsem entin the 2022 m id-term
1Forinstance, a June 2022 nationwide pollof Republican prim my voters fotm d that84 percent
w ould supportD onald Trum p if he ran for President in 2024.M cLaughlin & Assoc.,National
SurveyResults,at26tltme24,2022),hlpsr//mclaul linonline.coe zozz/o6/z4/ma-poll-naéonimonth1y-june-2022/.PresidentTrumpleadsthenextpotentialRepublicancandidateby44points,
id.at27,and leads the inctlmbentPresidentby 5 pointsif a generalelection w ere held today.1d.
at30.Otherpollsvalidatethesem lmbers.See,e.g.,lowansforTax Relief,GT o11:Iow nnqlike Gov.
Reynolds as Biden's jupport Slides''(Ju1y 2122022),hûpsr//tr reliefaor#poll-iowrs-likegovemor-reynolds-%-bidens-suppol-slides/(PresldentTrumpleadsBiden by 11pointsl:2'TIPP
.
Insights,'IGolden TIPP Poll:President Trum p, a form ldable candidate in 2023 Republlcation
primaries''tlune 24,2022),hûps://ameHcre rOews.coe épp-president-tmmp-a-forH dable-
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 2 of 27
elections has been decisive for Republican candidates. On August 8, 2022,in a shockingly
.
aggressivem ove- and with no understanding ofthe distressthatitwotlld causem ostAm ericans-
roughly two dozen SpecialAgentsoftheFederalBureau ofInvestigation (&TBI'),directed by
attom eys ofthe'U .S.DepartmentofJusticettheRGovernmenf),raidedthehomeofPresident
D onald J.Tnzm p.According to the Governm ent,the agents seized domlm ents,privileged and/or
potentially privileged m aterials,and otheritem s- including photos,handwritten notes,and even
PresidentTrum p'spassportsz- thatw ereoutsidethelaw fulreach ofan already overbroad warrant.
President Trum p,like a11 ciézens,is protected by the Fotu'
th Am endm entto the United States
k
Constittztion.Property seized in violation ofhisconstitutionalrightsm ustberetum ed forthwith.
Law enforcementis a shield thatprotects Am ericatls.Itcnnnotbe lzsed as a weapon for
politicalpurposes.n erefore,weseekjudicialassistanceintheaftermathofanunprecedentedand
lmnecessaly raid on PresidentTnlm p'shom e atM ar-a-Lago,in Palm Beach,Florida.
From the firstm oméntthatthe Governmentinform ed M ovant,through counsel,thata
search w as tmderway,he dem anded t'
ransparency.M ovant asked the G ovem m entthe questions
thatany Am erican citizen would ask underthe circzlm stances,nam ely:
* W hy raid m y hom ew1111aplatoon offederalagentswhen 1havevoltmtarily cooperated
n4t11yourevery request?
'
* W hatare you trying to hide from the public- given thatyou requested thatltum off
a11hom e security cam eras,and even refused to allow m y attom eys to observe what
youragents were doing?
* W hy haveyou refused to tellm e whatyou took from my hom e?
cr didate-in-zoz4-republicr -pHmo es/(PresidentTrump leadsthe2024 Republican primmy
fieldby439M.
>
2On A ugustl5, 2022,oneweek aftertheitenlswere seized,theGovem mentacu owledged that
the seized m aterialsincluded passportsbelonging to M ovant.Recognizing thatthe passportswere
notvalidly seized,the Governm entnotifed counselforM ovantso thatthey could be retrieved.
2
'
r
,
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 3 of 27
X
As setforth in detail below,the Government has declined to provide even the mostbaqic
inform ation aboutwhatw astaken,orwhy.H ow ever,the scantillform ation the Govem m enthaq
provided- a vaguely-w orded Receipt For Property and the warrant itself- raises signiûcant
Fourth Am endm entquestions aboutthistmprecedented and lmnecessary raid.
For instance,the Govem m enthms inform ed counselforPresidentTrum p thatprivileged
and/or potentially plivileged docllm ents w ere nm ong the item s taken from his hom e.But the
G ovem m enthasrefused to provideany inform ation regarding thenature ofthese domlm ents.'l'he
Suprem e Courthas held thatdocllm entsretlecting com m tmications betw een a Presidentmzd top
advisors are presllmptively privileged.United States v.Ntxon,418 U.S.683,782 (1974).
Protecting the integrity of these sdocllm ents is im portant not only to M ovant but also to the
institution ofthe Presidency.
Significantly,the Govem m enthœsrefused to provide PresidentTnlmp with any reason for
1
,
the unprecedented,generalsem'ch ofhis hom e.To date,the Govem m enthas failed to legitim ize
itshistoricdecision to raid the home ofaPresidentwho had been fully cooperative.Instead,faced
w ith public backlmsh,the Attom ey G eneralhastaken the llnheard-ofstep ofnn
'notm cing atapress
conference that he w is w illing to release portions of a sealed sem'ch w arrant application.
Govem m ent leaks to favored m edia outlets have provided ever-changing, atld inaccurate,
Ijustifications''forthepoliticizedconductoftheFBIandDepartmentofJusticeC;DOJ'').These
tmsupported Kjustifications''by anonymous sourceshintata breakdown in commtmications
between PresidentTrum p'srepresentativesand theGovem m ent,orthatthere developed a need to
obtain a search w arrant.The actual chronology of events clearly establishes thatthere w as no
raidandthereisnobasisforkeepinginfonration ibouttheraidfrom the
I'exigency''foraforceful
,
public.M ovantthereforerequeststhattheCourtordertheGovem menttoprovidetheinformation
3
I
I
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 4 of 27
soughtby thism otion,and to takethe otherm emsuressetforth in detailbelow,in orderto protect
V ovant'sconstitutionalrightsundertheFourth Amendment.
II.
BA CK GR OUN D
A.
PresidentDonald J.Trum p'sV oluntarv A gslstance
On January 20,2021,PresidentTnlm p and hisfnm ily leftthe W lliteH ouse.They m oved
back to theirhom e atM ar-a-Lago in Palm Beach,Florida.M ar-a-taago is a historic landm ark,a
m ansion with 58 bedroonls and 33 bathroom s on 17 acres of land extending from the Atlantic
Ocean tothelntracoastalW aterway- hencethenam e,which m eansttsea-to-lake.''Consistentwith
every m odem Presidentialtransition,staf conducted the m ove on a condensed tim efram e.'
Ihat
m ove,like hom e m oves tmdertaken by m ostAm ericans,involved boxes.Itwis done during the
day,with the boxesin fullviem 3
/
.
After President Trump and his fnmlly settled back into their hom e, em ployees at the
NationalArchivesandRecordsAdministTation CGNARY'Iinquiredastowhetherany docllments
w ereinadvertently transferred by the m oversto M ar-a-Lago.In January 2022,M ovantvoluntarily
asked NAllA movers to come to M ar-a-Lago to receive 15 boxes of docllments CG15 NM tA
Boxes'')thathad been broughtby nioversto M ar-a-Lago,so thatthey could be transferred to
N AltA headquartersin W ashington,D C.
On February 8,2022,N AltA m adethe following public statem ent:
Throughoutthe coutse ofthe lastyear,N AltA obtained the cooperation ofTrum p
representativesto locate Presidentialrecords thathad notbeen transferred to the
N ationalArchives atthe end ofthe Trum p adm inistration.W hen a representative
inform ed NA ltA in D ecem ber2021 thatthey had located som e recordsfN AltA
arranged forthem to be securely transported to W % hington.N AltA officialsdid
notvisitor'kaid''theM ar-a-Lagoproperty.
A photograph typical of the m ove of boxes accompanies the article fotm d at
ho s:.
//> w.npr.org/2022/02/10/1079832l65/con IntelligenceSurveillanceActwarrant'spenetrationinto
then-cr didateTnzmp'sirmercircle.An AssistantDirectorattheFB1wasreferredto prosecution
forlying repeatedly abouttheTrump probe,andtextexchangesbetweenthelead agent(Peter
Strzok)andhisparamolzr(LisaPage)reflecttheircompletedisdain and biasagainstPresident
Trtzm p and his supporters,while they were entrusted w ith probing the farcicalRussian collusion
Cj.
mm
* S.
W ithout further inform ation from the Govem m ent, President Tnlm p currently has no
ability to assesswhetherany FBIagentsinvolved in theRussiadefnm ation m atterarepnrticipàting
with N SD in the currentsituation.Historically,courts tend to give significant deference to 1aw
enforcem entrepresentativeswho weigh in againstnon-disclosureofpotentially sensitivem aterials
because of EEinvestigative''needs or witness safety.But,in light of recent FBl behavior when
President Trum p is a part of its aim , this Courtshould feel obliged to dem and candor and
transparency,andnotjust''tnlstus''assertionsfrom DOJ.TheappointmentofaSpecialM aster
!
with a fair-m inded approach to providing defense cotm selwith inform ation needed to supportany
Rule41(g)filingisanappropriateuseofthisCourt'sauthorityonsuchsensitivematters.
B.
This Court Should A ppoint A Special M aster To Protect M ovant's
ConstitvtgpnalRiehts.
-
M ovantrequeststhatthisCourtappointa SpecialM asterpursuantto ltule53(a)(l)(B)of
theFederalRùlesofcivilProcedureaizdthiscourt'sinherentequitablepowersandauthority.This
step- which the Govem m ent itself has requested in cases involving the seizure of privileged
and/or potentially privileged m aterials- is needed to preserve the sanctity of executive
com mtmicationsand otherprivileged materials.Furtherm ore,M ovantrequeststhatthisCourtissue
14
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 15 of 27
aprotectiveorderenjoiningtheUnitedStatesfrom anyfurtherreview oftheitemqseizedtmtilthis
CourtcanruleonthepresentMotion.SeeFed.R.Civ.P.26(b)(5)& (c)(1),
'S.D.Fla.L.R.26.l(g).
In addition,M ovant requests that this Court directthe United States to prepare and provide a
specificanddetailedReceiptforProperty.SeeFed.R.Crim.P.41(9.ThelilkeceiptForProperty''
provided to M ovanton August8,2022 isso vague and lacking in specifcity thatthereaderdoes
notknow whatw asseized from M ovant'shom e.
Seized Docum entsReflecting Presidential
Com m ungcationsW ith AdvisorsA re Presum ptivelv Privileeed
The docum ents seized at M ar-a-Lago on August 8,2022, were seized from President
Trllm p and w ere created during his term ms President. A ccordingly, the docllm ents are
GGpresllm ptively privileged''tmtilproven otherwise.Nixon,4l8 U .S.at782.Only an evaluation by
a neutralreview er,a SpecialM mster,can securethe sanctity oftheseprivileged materials.
Asageneralm atter,the likelihood thattheGovernm entseized privileged m aterialsuggests
the need for a carefulreview process.Forexam ple,while there hmsneverbeen a search wan'ant
executed atthe hom e of a President of the United States,federal regulations acknowledge the
delicatenatureofreviewingalltypesofprivilegedmaterial.Under28C.F.R.j59.4(b)(2),federal
officers m ay seek to search for and seize docllm ents from certain classes of professionals-
including lawyers- orlly aftersecuring therecom m endation oftheU.S.Attom ey andtheapproval
of a Deputy AssistantAttom ey General.The m essage ofthatgtzideline is clear- the utm ostcare
m ustbetaken in theseiztzreofpotentially privileged m aterials.
The presentm atlertmdoubtedly involves such m aterials.During the Clinton presidency,
this issue of privilege- specifically,thepresumption of privilege- was raised in response to a
grandjurysubpoenadirectedtoW hiteHousecounsel.SeeInreGrandluryProc.,5F.Supp.2d
21(D.D.C.),ay '
dsubnom.In?':Ltndsey,148F.3d 1100(D.C.Cir.1998),andJ-J/'
1inpart,rev'd
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 16 of 27
inpartsubnom.InreLindsey,158F.3d1263(D.C.Cir.1998).W hilethecontextdiffersfrom the
presentcase,thecourt'sanalysisofthenatureoftheevidencesoughtbythegrandjuryinthatcase
applieswith equalstrength here.There,theU .S.DistrictCourtfortheDistrictofColum biaadhered
to the Supreme Court's holding pertaining to evidence sopght(orseized)from a President:
EElm henthePresidentoftheUnitedStatesassertsaclaim ofexecutiveprivilege,thedistrictcourt
hasaIdutyto...treatthesubpoenaedmaterialmspèesumpttvelyprivileged.'''1d.at25(quoting
Nixon,418U.S.at713).Furthermore,i:
ilatthetimethedocumentsormaterialswerecreated,they
içreflectpresidential decision-m aking and deliberations,''they are presllm ptively privileged.1d.
(quotingInreSealed Case,121F.3d729,744(D.C.Cir.1997)),
.seealsoDellumsv.Powell,561
F.2d 242,246 (D.C.Cir.1977)CThe Epresdlmptive'privilegerforexecutivecommunicationsl
embpdiesasjrongpresllmption,atldnotmerelyalip-servicereference.').
W ith the concltlsion that the m aterials seized from the M ovant are a1l presllm ptively
privileged,itis tmrea onable to allow the prosecutorialtenm to review them withoutm eaningful
safeguards.Shortof rem rning the seized '
item s to M ovant,only a neutral review by a Special
M astercan protectthe Gûigreatpublic interest'in preserving tthe confidentiality ofconversations
thattake place in the President's performance oflzis om cialduties'because such confidentiality
isnecessary to protectlthe eFectivenessofthe executive decision-m aking process.'''In re Grand
JuryProc.,5F.Supp.24 at25(citingNixonv.Sirica,487F.2d700,717(D.C.Cir.1973),
.Inre
SealedCase,12lF.3dat742).
A DO J FilterTeam W illNotProtectPresidentTrum pgsRiehts
TheGovemmenthasadvisedcotmselforPresidentTrllmpthatitisu'tilizinglawyerswithin
D OJ'sN SD as a GGliltertenm .''ln certain instances,a flterprotocolcan serve an im portantrole
w here theD epartmentofJustice seizes docum entsthatare likely to be privileged.Asthe Justice
16
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 17 of 27
Manualnotes,afiltertenm (alsocalledaEEprivilegetenm''orLç
taintteam'')canbeused forthe
G'lim ited review ofarguably privileged m aterialto ascertain whetherthem aterialiscovered by the
w arrant''and to protectthe disclostlre of privileged com m llnications.U.S.D ep'tofJust,Justice '
M anlkalj9-13.420,atjE.However,ratherthanrelyingonthepresentûlterprotocol,thisCourt
should appointaSpecialM asterfora variety ofre% ons.
'l'heim plementation ofthisflterprotocolwasprocedtlrally defcient.The Eleventh Circuit
haswritten,G:(cg
.
xparte communicationsgenerally aredisfavored becausethey'conflictw1t11a
d
ftmdsmentalpreceptofoursystem ofjustice:afairhean'ngErequiresareasonableopporttmityto
know the claim softheopposing party andto m eetthem .'''fn re Colony Square Co.,8l9F.2d 272,
276n.12(11thCir.1987)(quotingInreParadyneCorp.,803F.2d604,612(111 Cir.1986)).In
InreSearch WarrantIssuedJune13,2019,942 F.3d 159,178-79(4th Cir.2019)(GGBaltimore
f.tzw Firm'à,theFourthCircuitspecifcallypotedtheproblem ofsettingflterprotocolsexparte,
in reversing a districtcourtdecision denying a restraining orderon the review ofseized m aterial.
Among otherissues,theBaltimoref.
tzw Firm courtreversed àecattsethemagistratejudgehad
approved a filter protocolw ithoutconducting appropriate adversarialproceedings,which w ould
have allowed the defense to advocate forpropersafeguards.Id G'In such contested proceedings,
thejudgecouldhavebeenfully informedoftherelevantbackgroundonthe(defendant),mswell
as the nature ofthe seized m aterials.''16L W ithoutthe affdavit,the defense doesnotlœ ow what
disclostlresw erem ade to the m agistrate in supportofitsfilterplan.
Here,too,themagistratejudgeapprovedtheflterprotocolwithoutinputfrom thedefense.
'rhe resultisaprotocolthatisplainly ineffective- itsim ply doesnotensurethatprosecution tenm
m emberswillnotaccess orbecom e aware ofpiivileged m aterials particularly asth: filtertenm 's
leaderis adeputy tothe lead prosecutorin thism atler.
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 18 of 27
Fundam entalFairnessR equiresThatThisCourtAppointA SpecialM aster
Courtsconsidering analogousissueshaveappointed SpecialM asters,w 1t11onecourtnoting
thevalue ofa SpecialM % terin com parison with a filterteam .ln particular,thisCourtand others
have % sessed the use of SpecialM asters follow ing the execution ofsearch warrantsatattom eys'
offices- contexts involving sim ilar m atters pf privilege with far less historic importance.For
example,in Unitedstatesv.Stewart,No.02-cr-395,2002W L 1300059(S.D.N.Y.Jtmel1,2002),
theU .S.DistrictCourtforthe Southem DistrictofN ew Y ork weighed an attorney'srequestfora
SpecialM aste
'r afterthe G overnm enthad searched heroffce pursuantto a warrant.A ccordingly,
thatcourtconsidered thenarrow question ofwhetherseized m aterialshould bereviewedby aflter
tenm orby a SpecialM mster.The courtappointed a SpecialM mster,highlighting certain concerns
inherent to m any filter prötocols- including the one presently in place- and the benefits of
appointing aSpecialM aster.Stewart,2002 W L 1300059,at*7-8.The courtalso cited three other
courp thathad allowed filterteamsto review seized materialsand lateropined Rthatthe use of
other m ethods of review w ould have been betten''1d. at *6.For example,in United States v.
Hunter,13F.Supp.2d574,583& n.2(D.Vt.1998),thecourtnoted,withthebenefitofhindsight,
that:Etliltmay havebeen preferableforthescreening ofpotrntially privilegedrecordstobeleft
nottoa(ûlterteam)buttoaspecialmasterormagistratejudge.''
Ultim ately,theStewartcourtappointed a SpecialM aster- w ith the authority to determine
responsiveness,privilege issues,and w hether any valid exceptions to the privilege exist- on
faim ess grotmds.Id.at*8-10.In appointing a SpecialM aster,the courtnoted the im portance of
establishing aprocedurethatwasGGnotonly ...fairbutalso appearled)tobefair,''addingthat
tGrtlheappearance offaimesshelpsto protectthe public'séonfdencein theadministTation of
jtlsticeandthewillingnessofclientstoconsultwith theirattorrleys.''1d.at*8.SeealsoIn the
18
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 19 of 27
Matterofsearch WarrantsExecutedonApril9,2018,No.l8-MJ-3161(S.D.N.Y.),Dkt.38at8,
Dkt 104at88(similarlyappointingaSpecialM atertoreview docllmentsseizedfrom attorney's
offceinlightofb0thfaimessandtheperceptionoffaimessl;Unitedstatesv.Abbell,9l4F.Supp.
519,519(S.D.Fla.1995)(findingthatKGtheresponsivenessandprivilegeissuesraised''following
the seizure ofmateriks from a law firm GEare exceptionaland wazrantreferralto a Special
M RS
'ter.'').''
A s a general m atter, given the circllm stances here, a taint tenm is insllm cient. ET he
appearance ofJtkstice m ustbe served,as wellasthe interests ofJustice.Itisa greatleap offaith
to expectthatm embers ofthe generalpublicw ould believe thatany such Chinese wallw ould be
impenetrable;thisnotwithstmldingthehonorofan (AssistantUnited StatesAttomeyl.''Stewart,
2002W L 1300059,at*8 (citingInreSearch WarrantforZlw OfhcesExecutedonM arch 19,
1992,153F.R.D.55,59(S.D.N.Y 1994:.
This m atter has captured the attention of the Am erican public. M erely Kiadequate''
safeguards are notacceptable when the m atter a
'thand involvesnotonly the ccmstitutionalrights
of PresidentTrum p, but also the preservation of executive privilege.M ovant submits that the
appointm entof a SpecialM asteristhe only appropriate action and,foritto'
have any m eaning at
al1, a protective order should issue ordering the United States to cease review of the seized
m aterialsim m ediately.
C.
The G overnm entM ustProvide An Inform ativeReceiptForPropertv.
Rule41(9 oftheFederalRulesofCriminalProcedurerequiresthat1aw enforcementleave
a G:lkeceiptfor Property''with the person from whom the item s w ere seized,oratthelocation of
thesearch.Fed.R.Crim.P.41(9(1)(C).And,Rule41(9(B)states,G'lnventory..
Anom cerpresent
during the execution ofthew arrantm ustprepareand verify an ihventory ofapy property seized.''
19
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 20 of 27
'rheruledoesnotjtkstdictatecreating an inventory butrequiresthatitbeftverifiedr''aterm that
suggests som e assessm entofthecontentsofthe receipt.Therule furtherrequiresthatthe Giofficer
executing the warrant ... prom ptly retum it- together with a copy of the inventory- to the
magistratejudgedesignatedonthewarrant''Fed.R.Crim.P.41(f)(1)(D).Onrequest,thejudge
m ustççgive acopy oftheinventory totheperson from whorq orfrom whoseprem ises,the property
wastakenl.l''1d.
Attachedhereto asExhibitl arethethreepagesofEGRecçiptforProperty''lef4by theagents
following the sem'
ch ofthe form er President's hom e on A ugust 8,2022.'
Fhe GEReceipt''lists 45
entries describing itemq as a EEBox labeled (mlmberl''orGçBinder ofPhotos,''in addition to
documentsthatarevariously identified asmarked Secret,Top SecretorConfidential.Combined
with asealed Search W an'antAm davit,thisEGlR.
eceipt''doeslitlleto identify the m aterialsthatwere
seized from President Trtlm p's hom e. This level of detail does not m eet the standard of
I'
verification''requiredinRule41(9.
An inventory ofproperty seized is m inisterial.United States v.Robiytson,N o.08-60179-
CR,2008W L 5381824,at*9-10(S.D.Fla.Dec.19,2008).However,itisamatteroffundnmental
fairnessthatthe agents atleastidentify from whatlocations each box ofdocum ents was seized;
whetherthese boxes w ere atthe location or were boxes thatthe agents broughtw ith them and
Glled;whetherotheritem sw ere contained in those boxes;whetherconfidentiallabelswere b% ed
upon labelsim printed on thedocllm entsthem selves,and whetherthereturn labelwastheresultof
areview (ofpresllmptivelyprivilegedexecutivecommtmications)tomakethatdetermination.
M ovant submits the current Receipt for Property is legally deficient.Accordingly,the
G ovem m entshould berequired to provide a m ore detailed and inform ativeReceiptForProperty,
which statesexactly whatwasseized,and where itw aslocated when seized.In addition,M ovant
20
i
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 21 of 27
requeststhatthe Courtprovide him w ith a copy ofthe inventoly.This,along w1t11inspection of
the fullAffidavit,isthe only way to ensure the Presidentcan properly evaluate and availhim self
oftheimportantprotectionsofRule41.
lV.
C ON CLUSION
Forthe foregoing re% ons,PresidentD onald J.Trum p respectfully requeststhattllisCourt
l
issueanorderthat:(a)appointsaSpecialMaster;(b)enjoinsfurtherreview ofseizedmaterialsby
theGovemmenttmtilaSpecialMasterisappointed;(c)requirestheGovernmenttoprovideamore
detailedReceiptForProperty;and(d)reqtlirestheGovernmentto remm any item seizedthatwas
notwithin the scope ofthe Search W arrant.
Dated:August22,2022
Respectfully subm itted,
/s/Lindsev H alliaatl
Lindsey H alligan
FloridaBarN o.109481
511 SE 5th Avenue
FortLauderdale,FL 33301
Emnil:lindseyhalligano@gmail.com
/s/Jam esM .Tnzsty
Jam esM .Trusty
Ifrah Law PLLC
1717 Pennsylvania Ave.N .W .Suite 650
W ashington,D C 20006
Telephone:(202)524-4176
Email:jtrusty@ifrahlaw.com
(
proJlccvicesledcontemporaneously)
lsIM .Evan Corcoran
M .Evan Corcoran
SILVEU M IY OMPSONISLUTG I
M ITE,LLC
400 EastPrattStreet- Suit: p()()
Baltim ore,M D 21202
Telephone:(410)385-2225
Email:ecorcorr@ silvermr thompson.com
+rohacvicesledcontemporaneously)
21
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 22 of 27
CER TIFICATE OF SERW CE
l HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 22nd day of A ugust 2022,a copy of the foregoing
M otion ForJudicialOversightAnd AdditionalReliefw asserved via electronic mailon counsel
forthe Governm ent,assetforth below .
/s/Lindsev Halliaan
Lindsey H alligan
Served on:
Juan M tonio Gonzalez
UNITED STATES ATTORN W
FloridaBarN o.897388
99 NE 4t11Street,8th Floor
M inm i,Fl33132
Telephone:(305)961-9001
Email:jur .rtoio.gonziez@usdoj.gov
Jay 1.Bratt
Chief
Cotm terintelligence and ExportControlSection
N ationalSecurity Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue,N W
W ashington,D.C.20530
IllinoisBarN o.6187361
(202)233-0986
jay.brattz@lzsdoj.gov
22
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 23 of 27
E X H IB IT 1
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 24 of 27
Case 9:22-mj-08332-8ER Document17 Entered on FLSD Docket08/11/2022 Page 5 of7
Page 1of1
Fm59;(D-%4-4:4:$6)
MNIYED STATESDEPARTM ENT OFIUSTICE
FEDERALBUREAU OFINVESTIGATION
R EC EIPT F0 R Ph oyr
PERTY
'
j
y
'
'
case lD:
i
WF
.
on(date) 8/8/2n22
j
''
Itemls)Ilxehbelowwerq:
.
.
H collèœ dlsel4e#
(E1 ReceivedFD ReturnvdTo
D Rel#as4dTo
(Name) Mar-Aqagp
(StreetAddress) 1100SM EAN BLVD
.
'
(ciâ) PALM BCACH,FLj3h8ù
'
Destri/tiunofltemtslt
4 -Dpcumentj
29-Boxlabeled A-14
ab -BoxLqbpled A->
'
31-Box LabeledA-43
32-Box lbeled A-13
33:-Boy Labeled A-33:
(.
.
L
l
)
'
Rekphed By:
. '(
.
.
k
ù
1
l
i
.
.
'
-.
..
'
Rqtelved e= :
..
.
(ilgnature)
prin,eaxameznee:
. '.p-z.
4
. ,,
..
l
t
t
)
l
)
j
t
I
è
j
(
1
),
.
.
..
,
<
,
'
.
.. ..... . ..
(signàture)
.
.
.
!
(
i
i
. . .
.tjjyo > .
q zy
prinledNamerritle:
.J/-?
.
.
.
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 25 of 27
Case9:22-mj-08332-8ER Document17 Entered on FLSD Docket08/11/2022 Page 6 of7
Page 1of2
FD.
.
S97(RBv.4-$3-2010
UNITED 5TATE5 DEPARTM ENT O FJUSTICE
FEDERALBUREAU OF INVEW IGATION
R EC E IP T F9 R P R O P ER T Y
Case ID:
WF
On(date) 8/8/2022
itemls)listedbelow were:
W Colleœ d/elzed
Q ReceivedFrom
D ReœmedTo
D ReleasedTo
(Name) Mar-A-tago
(StreetAddress) 1100SOCEAN BLVD
.
(ciw) FAI.
M BM cH,FL33480
Desçripti/n@fltemts):
1-ExecutiveGrantofClemencyre:RogerJason Stone,Jr.
1A -Info re:Pro identofFrance
'
2 -O atherb.ound boxdfz
d.ii
.(#.,qn>
2A -Variousclassified/rs/K ldocumenu
3-PotentiplPlesidentialRecord
5 -Binderofphotos
6 -Blnderbfphotos
$'
LX'
an'
dWrgttmnngte
r.
x.
,
..
9-BoxIabeled A-12
10-Box Labeled A-15
10A -M.
i#çl,llanqou,SqcretDoqument:
11-BoxLabeled A-16
11A -MiscellanousTopsetretDocuments
12 -Boxlabeled A-17
13-BoxlabeledA-18
13A -M iscell#neousTopsecreyDocuments
pb@led A-27
14-B(p I
.,
14-A-MlscellaneousEpnfidqntlalDocuments
.
,
.
.
.
..
.
....
.
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 26 of 27
Case9:22-mj-08332-8ER Document17 EnteredonFLSD Docket08/11/2022 Page 7of7
FD-69;(Rew 4-43-2416)
Page2of2
UNITED STATES DEPARTM ENT O FIUSTICE
FEDERALBUR:AU OFINVESTIGATION
RECEIPT F@ R éRO PERTX
15-BoxtabeledA-28
.
15A -MigcellaneousSecretDocuments
16-BozIabeled A-30
17 -BoxIabeledA-32
1:-BoxIabeled A-35
19-BoxIabeled4-23
,
19A -ConfidentialDocum ent
,
20-BoxLabeled A-22
21-Boxlabeled A-24
l
22-BoxLabeled A-34
23-BoxLabeled A-39
23A -M iscellaneousSecretDocuments
24 -BoxIabeled A-40
'
25 -BozLabeledA-41
25A -MlscellaneousConfldentialDocuments
26-BoxLabeled A-42
26A -QiscellaneousTopSecretDocuments
'
27-Box LabeledA-71
28 -Box Labeled4-73
28A -MiscellaneousTop ecretDocuments
Reeelved From :
Reeeîve By:
' signature
(signature)
prlnteu xamep ltle:
a(@>
.
èb
;:!f?m 'qïlzx
PrintedNamemltle
J .
Case 9:22-cv-81294 Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2022 Page 27 of 27
U NITED STATES DISTRIC T C OURT
SO U TH ERN DISTR ICT OF FLO RIDA
CA SE N O .
In the M atterofthe Search of
M ar-a-taago
1100 S.Ocean Blvd.
Palm Beach,FL 33480
CER TIFICA TION OF M .EVAN COR CO M N
M .EvanCorcoran,Esqtlire,pursuanttoRule4(b)oftheRtllesGoverningtheAdmission,
Practice,PeerReview,andDisciplineofAttorneys,hereby certifiesthat:(1)1havesttzdiedthe
LocalRulesoftheUnitedStatesDistrictCourtforthegouthern DistrictofFlorida; (2)lam a
m em berin good standing oftheBarofthe DistrictofColllm biw the United States DistrictCourt
fortheDistrictofM aryland,theUnited StatesDistrictCourtforthé DistrictofColum biw andthe
UnitedStatesDistrictCourtfortheEastem DistrictofVirginia;and(3)1havenotfiledthreeor
m ore m otionsforpro hac vice adm ission in tlzisDistzictwithin thelast365 days.
/s/M Evan Corcoran
M .Evan Corcoran
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?