Case 1:18-cr-00083-TSE Document 218 Filed 08/09/18 Page 1 of 4 PageID# 4184

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Alexandria Division
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
Crim. No. 1:18-cr-83 (TSE)
PAUL J. MANAFORT, JR.,

Defendant.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF GOVERNMENT’S
MOTION TO SEAL LIMITED PORTION OF SIDEBAR CONFERENCE
The United States of America, by and through Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III,
pursuant to Local Rule of Court 49(E) of the Local Criminal Rules for the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, respectfully requests an Order sealing a limited portion
of a sidebar conference held on August 7, 2018.
I.

Items to Be Sealed and Necessity for Sealing
1.

On August 7, 2018, the Court held a sidebar conference to address a line of

questioning pursued by the defense during their cross-examination of witness Richard Gates.
During the sidebar conference, substantive evidence pertaining to an ongoing investigation was
revealed. The following portions of the sidebar conference transcript identifies that evidence or
reveals details about that evidence: Aug. 7, 2018 Tr. at 1399: 14-19; 1402:1-2, 14-17; 1403: 1215.
2.

Disclosing the identified transcript portions would reveal substantive evidence

pertaining to an ongoing investigation. The government’s interest in protecting the confidentiality
of its ongoing investigations is compelling and justifies sealing the limited portion of the sidebar

1

 Case 1:18-cr-00083-TSE Document 218 Filed 08/09/18 Page 2 of 4 PageID# 4185

conference at issue here. In addition, sealing will minimize any risk of prejudice from the
disclosure of new information relating to that ongoing investigation.
II.

References to Governing Case Law
3.

The Court has the inherent power to seal materials. See United States v. Wuagneux,

683 F.2d 1343, 1351 (11th Cir. 1982); State of Arizona v. Maypenny, 672 F.2d 761, 765 (9th Cir.
1982); Times Mirror Company v. United States, 873 F.2d 1210 (9th Cir. 1989); see also Shea v.
Gabriel, 520 F.2d 879 (1st Cir. 1975); United States v. Hubbard, 650 F.2d 293 (D.C. Cir. 1980);
In re Braughton, 520 F.2d 765, 766 (9th Cir. 1975). “The trial court has supervisory power over
its own records and may, in its discretion, seal documents if the public’s right of access is
outweighed by competing interests.” In re Knight Pub. Co., 743 F.2d 231, 235 (4th Cir. 1984).
4.

“[L]aw enforcement agencies must be able to investigate crime without the details

of the investigation being released to the public in a manner that compromises the investigation.”
Virginia Dep’t of State Police v. Washington Post, 386 F.3d 567, 574 (4th Cir. 2004). “[A]
compelling governmental interest exists in protecting the integrity of an ongoing law enforcement
investigation.” Id. at 579. Although “not every release of information contained in an ongoing
criminal investigation file will necessarily affect the integrity of the investigation,” one
consideration is “whether the granting of access to the contents of an ongoing police investigation
file will disclose facts that are otherwise unknown to the public,” id. The government has a
“paramount interest in preventing the release of information which may reveal the direction and
progress of ongoing criminal investigation” that is not otherwise known to the public. United
States v. Corbitt, 879 F.2d 224, 235 n.14 (7th Cir. 1989).

2

 Case 1:18-cr-00083-TSE Document 218 Filed 08/09/18 Page 3 of 4 PageID# 4186

5.

Should the Court require additional explanation as to how the portions of the

sidebar conference at issue relate to an ongoing criminal investigation, the government can provide
that information ex parte and in camera.
III.

Period of Time Government Seeks to Have the Matter Remain Under Seal
6.

The government’s concerns would continue until the relevant aspect of the

investigation is revealed publicly, if that were to occur.
WHEREFORE, the United States respectfully requests that an order be entered allowing
the identified portions of the sidebar conference on August 7, 2018, to be placed under seal.

Respectfully submitted,
ROBERT S. MUELLER, III
Special Counsel
Dated: August 9, 2018

/s/
Greg D. Andres
Brandon L. Van Grack
Special Counsel’s Office
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20530
Telephone: (202) 616-0800

Uzo Asonye
Assistant United States Attorney
Eastern District of Virginia

Attorneys for United States of America

3

 Case 1:18-cr-00083-TSE Document 218 Filed 08/09/18 Page 4 of 4 PageID# 4187

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 9th day of August, 2018, I will cause to be filed electronically
the foregoing with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will then send a
notification of such filing (NEF) to the following:
Thomas E. Zehnle (VA Bar No. 27755)
Law Office of Thomas E. Zehnle
601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Suite 620
Washington, D.C. 20001
tezehnle@gmail.com
Jay R. Nanavati (VA Bar No. 44391)
Kostelanetz & Fink LLP
601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Suite 620
Washington, D.C. 20001
jnanavati@kflaw.com

/s/
____
Brandon L. Van Grack
Special Counsel’s Office
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20530
Telephone: (202) 616-0800
Attorney for the United States of America

4