Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 1 of 105 A0 106 (Rev. 06/09) Application for a Search Warrant UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the Southern District of New York In the Matter of the Search of (Brie?y describe the prOperzjy to be searched or identity the person by name and address) A Device Containing the Results of Three Email Search Warrants, See Attachment A APPLICATION FOR A SEARCH WARRANT I, a federal law enforcement officer or an attorney for the government, request a search warrant and state under penalty of perjury that I have reason to believe that on the following person or property (identz'?i the person or describe the 2" located in the Southern District of New York there is now concealed (identi?z the person or describe the property to be seizeoQ: PLEASE SEE ATTACHED AFFIDAVIT AND RIDER. The basis for the search under Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(c) is (check one or more): Mevidence of a crime; El contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed; El property designed for use, intended for use, or used in committing a crime; a person to be arrested or a person who is unlawfully restrained. The search is related to a violation of: Code Section O??ense Description 18 USC 371, 1005, 1014, Conspiracy to defraud the United States; false bank entries; faise statements to a 1343, 1344 financial institution; wire fraud; bank fraud The application is based on these facts: PLEASE SEE ATTACHED AFFIDAVIT AND RIDER. [if Continued on the attached sheet. sf Delayed notice of 30 days (give exact ending date if more than 30 days: is requested under 18 U.S.C. 3103a, the basis of which is set forth on the attached sheet. Printed ndine and title . Sworn to before me and signed in my presence. Date: f?ir I I: I r. Judgz's Sigm-T?Y? City and state: NW TWA, WY Hon. Gabriel W. Gorenstein, lliS?lVlagistrate Judge Printed name and title e: - esu Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 2 of 105 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In the Matter of the Application of the United TO BE FILED UNDER SEAL States Of America for a Search Warrant for A Device Containing the Results of Three Email Agent Af?davit in Support of Search Warrants, USAO Reference No 3 Application for a Search Warrant 2018R00127 i SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK) 55.: Special Agent-of the United States Attorney?s Office for the Southern I I. Introduction A. Af?ant 1. I am a Special Agent with the United States Attorney?s Office for the Southern District of New York (the I have been a Special Agent with the USAO since August 2016. Ipreviously served as a Special Agent with the United States Department of Labor Inspector General from May 2011 to August 2016. In the course of my experience and training in these positions, Ihave participated in criminal investigations into federal offenses involving a wide array of financial crimes, including frauds on financial institutions. I also have training and experience executing search warrants, including those authorizing the search of email accounts. 2. I make this Affidavit in support of an application pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure for a warrant to search the electronic device specified below (the ?Subject Device?) for the items and information described in Attachment A. This affidavit is based upon my personal knowledge; my review of documents and other evidence my conversations with other law enforcement personnel; and my training, experience and advice received concerning the use of computers in criminal activity and the forensic analysis of electronically stored information Because this affidavit is being submitted for the limited purpose of establishing probable 2 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 3 of 105 cause, it does not include all the facts that I have learned during the course of my investigation. Where the contents of documents and the actions, statements, and conversations of others are reported herein, they are reported in substance and in part, except where otherwise indicated. B. Prior Warrants and the Subject Device 3. As set forth in detail below, the USAO and the Federal Bureau of Investigation are investigating, among other things, a scheme by Michael Cohen to defraud multiple banks. Cohen is an attorney who currently holds himself out as the personal attorney for President Donald Trump: and who previously-luseui'vedwfor over a decade as. an executive 1n the Trump Organization, an international conglomerate with real estate and other holdings. 4. In connection with an investigation then being conducted by the Of?ce of the Special Counsel the FBI sought and obtained from the Honorable Beryl A. Howell, Chief United States District Judge for the District of Columbia, three search warrants (collectively, the Warrants?) for emails and other content information associated with two email accounts . used by Cohen. Specifically: A a. On or about July 18, 2017, the FBI sought and obtained a search warrant for emails in the account _@gmail.com (the ?Cohen Gmail Account?) sent or received between January 1, 2016 and July 18, 2017. This warrant, which is numbered 17-mj-00503, is attached as Exhibit A (the ?First Cohen Gmail Warrant?). b. On or about November 13, 2017, the FBI sought and obtained a search warrant for emails in the Cohen Gmail Account sent or received between June 1, 2015 and November 13, 2017. This warrant, which is numbered 17?mj?00'855, is attached as Exhibit (the ?Second Cohen Gmail Warrant?). c. On or about November 13, 2017, the FBI sought and obtained a search warrant for emails in the account I?the ?Cohen Account?) sent or 3 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 4 of 105 received between the opening of the Cohen Account1 and November 13, 2017. This warrant, which is numbered 17?mj?00854, is attached as Exhibit (the ?Cohen Warrant?). 5. The SCO has since referred certain aspects of its investigation into Cohen to the USAO, which is working with the New York Field Of?ce. As part of that referral, on or about February 8, 2018, the SCO provided the USAO with all non-privileged emails and other content information obtained pursuant to the SCO Warrants. A ?lter team working with the SCO -- h-adwpreviously reviewed the e?mails producedpurs?uantmto Warrants for privilege. 6. These emails are contained on the Subject Device, which is particularly described as a black and red USB drive with a white label that says ?Tracking 180208140208.? That is, the Subject Device contains the emails and other content information obtained pursuant to the SCO Warrants, less any emails that were screened. and removed by the privilege team. 7. The Subject Device is presently located in the Southern District of New York. C. The Subject Offenses 8. The af?davits in support of the SCO Warrants describe evidence of several different courses of conduct by Cohen, including, among other things, false statements to ?nancial institutions relating to the purpose of an account he opened in the name of Essential Consultants LLC and the nature of funds ?owing into that account, and activities undertaken by Cohen on behalf of certain foreign persons or foreign entities without having registered as a foreign agent. The SCO Warrants accordingly de?ne the evidence to be seized by reference to subject offenses 1 Based on my review of this warrant and the af?davit in support of it, I know that the warrant did not specify a time period, but the af?davit indicated that, pursuant to court order, the service provider had provided non?content information for the Cohen Account that indicated that the account contained emails from the approximate period of March 2017 through the date of the warrant. Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 5 of 105 and speci?c categories of information related to these courses of conduct. The subject offenses in the SCO Warrants are summarized as follows: Exhibit Warrant Subiect Offenses in Prior Warrant A First Cohen Gmail 18 U.S.C. 1014 (false statement to ?nancial institution), 195 6 (money Warrant laundering), 951 (acting as an unregistered foreign agent), and 22 U.S.C. 611 et seq. (Foreign Agents Registration Act Second Cohen Gmail 18 U.S.C. 1014 (false statement to ?nancial institution), 1343 (wire Warrant ?aud), 1344 (bank ?aud), 1956 (money laundering), 951 (acting as an unregistered foreign agent), and 22 U.S.C. 611 et seq. (PARA) Cohen Warrant 18 U.S.C. 1014 (false statement to ?nancial institution), 1343 (wire ?aud), 1344 (bank ?aud), 1956 (money laundering), 951 (acting as an unregistered foreign agent), and 22 U.S.C. 6 11 ct seq. (PARA) 9. Based on my participation in this investigation, including my review of documents obtained pursuant to subpoena and court order, my conversations with witnesses and review of reports of conversations with witnesses, and my review of publicly available information, I have learned of additional conduct by Cohen, described below, which was not described in the af?davit seeking the First Cohen Gmail Warrant and was described brie?y in the af?davits seeking the Second Cohen Gmail Warrant and the Cohen Warrant.2 10. I am therefore requesting authority to expand the search of the non-privileged e? mails obtained pursuant to the SCO Warrants, as contained on the Subject Device, for evidence related to this additional conduct. As set forth below, in addition to the categories of evidence already described in the SCO Warrants, there is probable cause to believe that the Subject Device contains evidence of violations of 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to defraud the United States), 1005 (false bank entries), 1014 (false statements to a ?nancial institution), 1343 (wire fraud), and 1344 (bank fraud) (collectively, the ?Subject Offenses?), related to the additional conduct described below.3 2 I do not base this application on my review of emails obtained pursuant to the SCO Warrants. 3 The SCO Warrants cite many of the same statutes as subject offenses and describe categories of information that likely encompass evidence of the additional conduct described herein. 5 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 6 of 105 II. Probable Cause Regarding the Subject Offenses 11. Together with this application, I am submitting an application for a search warrant, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703, for all content and other information associated with the Cohen Gmail Account, for the time period November 14, 2017 to the present; the Cohen Account, for the time period November 14, 2017 to the present; and three other email accounts. The af?davit in support of this application is attached as Exhibit (the ?Accompanying Affidavit?), and is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. 12. As set forth in the AccompanyingAf?davit, there i-sprobable cause to believe that Cohen has made af?rmative misrepresentations in and omitted material information from financial statements and other disclosures that Cohen provided to multiple banks in connection with a transaction intended to relieve Cohen of approximately $22 million in debt he owed on taxi medallion loans from the banks. As set forth in detail in the Accompanying Affidavit, in these ?nancial statements, and in his oral and other written statements to these banks, Cohen appears to have intentionally omitted cash assets that he began receiving in 2017 from new consulting work; (ii) signi?cantly understated his total holdings of cash and cash equivalents; and failed to inform the banks from which he was seeking debt relief that he had agreed to make a $3.8 million cash payment to a third party, in connection with acquisition of the taxi medallions securing Cohen?s debt. By making these misrepresentations and material omissions, Cohen avoided making payments on his loans, and attempted to and has secured proposed agreements from the banks to relieve him of certain repayment obligations worth millions of dollars. Nevertheless, in an abundance of caution, I am seeking explicit authorization to search the Subject Device for evidence of this additional conduct. Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 7 of 105 13. As noted above, the Accompanying Af?davit seeks email content for the Cohen Gmail Account and the Cohen Account for the period fromNovember 14, 2017 to the present, and therefore establishes probable cause that a search of the email content from that time period will reveal evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of the Subject Offenses. As set forth below, the Accompanying Affidavit also establishes probable cause to believe that a search of the Subject Device (73. e. the non-privileged emails from the earlier time periods covered by the SCO Warrants) will similarly reveal evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of the Subject Offenses.4 For example, as described in the Accompanying Af?davit: a. In or about December 2014, Sterling National Bank (?Sterling?) agreed to lend approximately $22 million to Cohen?s medallion companies. See Accompanying Affidavit 11 14(0). b. In or about September 2015, Cohen began pushing Sterling for a reduction in his payments. See id 14(e). c. In or about October 2016, Cohen told a Sterling employee (?Sterling Employee-1?) that he had a potential buyer of his taxi medallions, named_, who . would agree to assume Cohen?s debt with Sterling (and Melrose Credit Union, the participating bank). See id. 11 14(g). Negotiations of the potential taxi medallion transaction then folldwed for more than a year. See id. 4 As noted, the Subject Device contains email content for the Cohen Gmail Account from the period of June 1, 2015 to November 13, 2017, and email content for the Cohen Account for the period of March 2017 to November 13, 2017, 2017 F1nanc1a1 Statemen that was also attached. See id 14(1). Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 8 of 105 d. On or about February 22, 2017, the Cohen Gmail Account5 sent an email to a Sterling employee (?Sterling Employee?2?) stating that he ?agreed to pay down 1 million from the loan amoun See id 1[ 14(g). e. On or about June 8, 2017, Cohen emailed Sterling Employee-1 from the Cohen Gmail Account, attaching a Sterling personal ?nancial statement form that had been ?lled out by hand, which referenced a statement of ?nancial condition, dated May 1, 2017 (the ?May f. On or about October 5, 2017, Cohen, using the Cohen Gmail Account, re- sent Sterling Employee? 2 a copy of his May 2017 Financial Statement. A day later, on October 6, 2017, Cohen, using the Cohen Gmail Account, emailed Sterling Employee?2 a statement of fmancial condition, dated September 30, 2017 (the ?September 2017 Financial Statement?). See id 11 14(m). The September 2017 Financial Statement omitted assets that Cohen held in certain bank accounts and substantially understated his available cash and cash equivalents. See id. 1111 19?20. g. It appears that Cohen set up the Cohen Account to receive emails he was previously receiving at the Cohen Gmail Account. On or about May 5, 2017, Cohen sent an email from the Cohen Account to a blind copy list of recipients, stating that ?[d]ue to the overwhelming volume of phone calls and emails coming into my previous cellular number and e-mail address, I have elected to create for Clients Only the following. Kindly use this new 5 As noted in n.2, supra, I do not base this application on my review of emails obtained pursuant to the SCO Warrants. Where the content of emails sent from or received by the Cohen Gmail Account and/or the Cohen MDPC Account are described herein, my description is based on copies of these emails produced by third parties pursuant to subpoena or otherwise. 8 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 9 of 105 information for all future contact and communications.? The signature line on the email listed the Cohen Account as the new email address. See id. 1] 26. h. Based on my review of header information obtained by court order, I have learned that, on approximately eight occasions in August and September 2017, while Cohen, - and and -were communicating about a term sheet for the Coheni- taxi medallion transaction, the Cohen Account sent or received emails from including emails on which Sterling employees were copied. On or about August 22, 2017, Cohen also used the Cohen Account to send an email to Sterling Employee?1. See id. 1] 27(a). i. Based on my review of header information obtained by court order, I have learned that on or about September 1, 20l7?at or around the time the '-and Cohen were negotiating a term sheet?the Cohen Account sent or received eight emails to or from_. See id. 112503). 14. Therefore, there is probable cause to believe that a search of the Subject Device will reveal evidence, fruit and instrumentalities of the Subject Offenses, including the following: a. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Sterling, Melrose, and/or taxi medallions; b. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving a plan, proposal, or agreement for Cohen and/ or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to others, including to and/or t? entities associated with him; 0. Communications, records, documents, and other files necessary to establish the identity of any person(s) including records that reveal the whereabouts of the person(s) Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 10 of 105 who communicated with the Cohen Gmail Account and/ or the Cohen Account about any plan or proposal or agreement for Cohen and] or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to others, including to and/ or entities associated with him; d. Communications between the Cohen Gmail Account and] or the Cohen Account and Jeffrey Getzel relating to Cohen?s bank accounts, taxes, debts, and] or finances; e. Evidence indicating the Cohen Gmail Account and the Cohen Account owner?s intent as it relates to the Subject Offenses under investigation. Procedures for Searching ESI A. Review of E81 15. Law enforcement personnel (including, in addition to law enforcement officers and agents, and depending on the nature of the E81 and the status of the investigation and related proceedings, attorneys for the government, attorney support staff, agency personnel assisting the government in this investigation, interpreters, and outside vendors or technical experts under government control) will review the E81 contained on the Subject Device for information responsive to the warrant. 16. In conducting this review, law enforcement personnel may use various methods to locate evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of the Subject Offenses, including but not limited to undertaking a cursory inspection of all emails contained on the Subject Device. This method is analogous to cursorily inspecting all the files in a file cabinet in an office to determine which paper evidence is subject to seizure. Although law enforcement personnel may use other methods as well, particularly including keyword searches, I know that keyword searches and similar methods are typically inadequate to detect all information subject to seizure. As an initial matter, keyword 10 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 11 of 105 searches work only for text data, yet many types of files commonly associated with emails, including attachments such as scanned documents, pictures, and videos, do not store data as searchable text. Moreover, even as to text data, keyword searches cannot be relied upon to capture all relevant communications in an account, as it is impossible to know in advance all of the unique words or phrases that investigative subjects will use in their communications, and consequently there are often many communications in an account that are relevant to an investigation but that do not contain any keywords that an agent is likely to search for. IV. Conclusion and Ancillary Provisions 17. Based on the foregoing, I respectfully request the court to issue a warrant to seize the items and information specified in Attachment A to this affidavit and to the Search and Seizure Warrant. 18. In light of the confidential nature of the continuing investigation, and for the reasons more fully set forth in the Accompanying Af?davit, I respectfully request that this affidavit and all papers submitted herewith be maintained under seal until the Court orders otherwise. Special Agent, USAO Sworn to before.- me on A day of February, 20l 8 N. w- ITED MM i ll Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 12 of 105 Attachment A 1. Device to be Searched The device to be searched (the ?Subject Device?) is described as a black and red USB drive with a white label that says ?Tracking 180208140208?, which contains emails and other content information obtained pursuant to the three search warrants, numbered 17?mj?00503, 17-mj-00855 and 17-mj?00854, obtained by the Special Counsel?s Of?ce less the emails that were screened and removed by the privilege team. 11. Review of ESI on the Subject Devices Law enforcement personnel (including, in addition to law enforcement officers and agents, attorneys for the government, attorney support staff, agency personnel assisting the government in this investigation, interpreters, and outside vendors or technical experts under government control) are authorized to review the E81 contained on the Subject Device for evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of one or more violations of 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to defraud the United States), 1005 (false bank entries), 1014 (false statements to a financial institution), 1343 (wire fraud), and 1344 (bank fraud) (collectively, the ?Subject Offenses?), as listed below: a. Communications, records, documents, and other files involving Sterling National Bank, Melrose Credit Union, and/or taxi medallions; b. Communications, records, documents, and other files involving a plan, proposal, or agreement for Michael'D. Cohen and] or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to others, including to i_ and/or entities associated with him; I c. The identity of any person(s) including records that reveal the whereabouts of the person(s) who communicated with _@gmail.com and/or - (the ?Subject Accounts?) about any plan or proposal or agreement for Michael D. Cohen and/ or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to others, including to _and/or entities associated with him; d. Communications between the Subject Accounts and Jeffrey Getzel relating to Michael D. Cohen?s bank accounts, taxes, debts, and/or ?nances; Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 13 of 105 e. Evidence indicating the owner of the Subject Accounts? intent as it relates to the Subject Offenses under investigation. Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 14 of 105 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 15 of 105 A0 93 (Rev. 11/13) Search and Seizure Warrant i1 .II- In a as UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT gum 91mm I it for the @5531! ates Courts District of Columbia In the Matter of the Search of 03 (Brie?y describe the property to be searched 3356:1117 mj 005 ll Beryl A or identify the person by name and address) A3-3[gned INFORMATION WITH THE EMAIL Date {/18 Seizure Warrant ACCOUNT Description: Seemh a? SEARCH AND SEIZURE WARRANT Any authorized law enforcement "Of?cer An application by a federal law enforcement of?cer or an attorney for the government requests the search of the following person or property located in the Northern District of California (identz'jjl the person or describe the prepare! to be searched amt/give its location): See Attachment A. I ?nd that the or any recorded testimony, establish probable cause to search and seize the person or property described above, and that such search will reveal (identify the person or describe the property [0 be seized): See Attachment B. YOU ARE COMMANDED to execute this warrant On or before August 1, 2017 (not to exceed 14 days) in the daytime 6:00 am. to 10:00 pm. Cl at any time in the clay or night because good cause has been established. Unless delayed notice is authorized below, you must give a copy of the warrant and a receipt for the property taken to the person from whom, or from whose premises, the property was taken, or leave the copy and receipt at the place where the property was taken. The of?cer executing this warrant, or an of?cer present during the execution of the warrant, must prepare an inventory as required by law and return this warrant and inventory to Hon, Beryl A. Howell United States Magistrate Judge) Cl Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3103 I ?nd that immediate noti?cation may have an adverse result listed in 18 U.S.C. 2705 (except for delay of trial), and authorize the of?cer executing this warrant to delay notice to the person who, or whose property, will be searched or seized (check the appropriate box) for days (not to exceed 30) El until, the facts justifying, the later speci?c date of Date and time issued: 7k? 117? . M) Judge 's signature City and state: Washington, DC, Hon. Howell Chier. 8. District Judge Printed name and title Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 16 of 105 A0 93 (Rev lfl3) Search and Seizure Warrant (Page 2) Return Case No.: Date and ti! wart ant exeetited; 7 Copy of warrant and itWentoty? left With 9' l7 was *09?5?593 7/ 9217/0 ?7 5 15% weak Lag? A - .. Inventory rnade in the presence of . Inventoryrof the property taken and narne ofany person(3) seized: La?tte ll50067 3w A 1.5; 4 Hpro JUL 2017 Clark: s. Bankruptcy Certi?cn tion declare under penalty of perjury that this inventory is correct and was returned along with the original warrant to the designatedjudge. Primed name and ri?e Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 17 of 105 ATTACHMENT A This warrant applies to information associated with the Google Mail Account -@gmail.com that is stored at premises owned, maintained, controlled, or operated by Google, a company headquartered at 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043. Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 18 of 105 ATTACHMENT B, I. Information to be disclosed by? Google To the extent that the information described in Attachment A is within the possession, custody, or control of the Google (hereinafter ?the Provider?), regardless of whether such information is stored, held or maintained inside or outside of the United States, and including any emails, records, files, logs, or information that have been deleted but are still available to the Provider, the Provider is required to disclose the following information to the government for each 111.11., m, a. The contents of all emails associated with the account, including stored or preserved copies of emails sent to and from the account, draft emails, the source and destination addresses associated with each email, the date and time at which each email was sent, and the size and length of each email; b. All records or other information regarding the identi?cation of the account, to include full name, physical address, telephone numbers and other identi?ers, records of session times and durations, the date on which the account was created, the length of service, the IP address used to register the account, log-in IP addresses associated with session times and dates, account status, alternative email addresses provided during registration, methods of connecting, log ?les, and means and source of payment (including any credit or bank-account number); c. The types of service utilized; d. All records or other information stored at any time by an individual using the account, including address books, contact and buddy lists, calendar data, pictures, and files; 6. All records pertaining to communications between the Provider and any person regarding the account, including contacts with support services and records of actions taken; and other identi?ers, records of session times and durations, the date on which the account was created, the length of service, the types of service utilized, the IP address used to register the account, log-in IP addresses associated with .session times and dates, account status, alternative e-mail addresses provided Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 19 of 105 during registration, all other user names associated with the account, all account names associated with the subscriber, methods of connecting; f. All search history'or web history; g. All records indicating the services available to subscribers of the accounts; h. All usernames associated with or sharing a lo gin IP address or browser cookie with the accounts; i. All cookies, including third-party cookies, associated with the user; j. All records that are associated with the machine cookies associated with the user; ?id 1 k. All telephone or instrument numbers associated with the Account (including MAC addresses, Electronic Serial Numbers Mobile Electronic Identity Numbers Mobile Equipment Identi?er Mobile Identi?cation Numbers Subscriber Identity Modules Subscriber Integrated Services Digital Network Number International Mobile Subscriber Identi?ers or International Mobile Equipment Identities II. Information to be Seized by the Government All information described above in Section I that constitutes evidence, contraband, fruits, and/.or instrumentalities of violations of 18 U.S.C. 1014 (false statements to a ?nancial . institution) and 18 U.S.C. 1956 (money laundering), as well as 18 U.S.C. 951 (acting as an unregistered foreign agent) and the Foreign Agents Registration Act 22 U.S.C. 611 et seq, involving Michael Dean Cohen and occurring on or after January 1, 2016, including, for each account or identi?er listed on Attachment A, information pertaining to the following matters: a. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Essential Consultants, b. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Bo and Abe Realty, c. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les that false representations to 'a ?nancial institution with relation to intended the purpose of an account or loan at that ?nancial institution; the nature of any business or entity associated with an Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 20 of 105 account a ?nancial institution; the source of funds ?owing into an account; or the purpose or nature of any ?nancial transactions involving that ?nancial institution; Records of any funds or bene?ts received by or offered to Michael Dean Cohen by, or on behalf of, any foreign government, foreign of?cials, foreign entities, foreign persons, or foreign principals; Communications, records, documents, and other ?les that reveal efforts by Michael Dean Cohen to conduct activities on behalf of, for the bene?t of, or at the direction of any foreign government, foreign of?cials, foreign entities, foreign persons, or u?lu, .. forei'gn?p?rincip?al?s; Evidence indicating how and when the account was accessed or used, to determine the geographic and chronological context of account access, use, and events relating to the crimes under investigation and to the account owner; Evidence indicating the account owner?s state of mind as it relates to the crimes under investigation; The identity of the person(s) who created or used the account, including records that help reveal the whereabouts of such person(s); and The identity of any records that help reveal the whereabouts of the communicated with the account about any matters relating to activities conducted by Michael Dean Cohen on behalf of, for the bene?t of, or at the direction of any foreign government, foreign of?cials, foreign entities, foreign persons, or foreign principals. Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 21 of 105 1 Exhibit Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 22,0f 105 revs. res A0 93 (Rev. 11113,) Search and Seizure Warrant UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District of Columbia In the Matter of the Search of (Etie?y ([2337 {be the pi ope} ty to he seat cited 3836? 1.17?mj?00855 0" idem?? ?mm-2 3 Assigned To: Chief Judge Howell, Beryl A INFORMATION WITH THE EMAIL Assign Date 1111312017 COM 3 Search and Seizure Warrant SEARCH AND SEIZURE WARRANT "re; WAny authorized law enforcement of?cer An application by a federal law enforcement of?cer or alt-attorney for the government requests the search of the following person or property located in the Northern District of California (identity the person or describe the property to be searched and give its io?catfoa): See Attachment A. I ?nd that the or any recorded testimony, establish probable cause to search and seize the person or preperty described above, and that sueh search will reveal (identi?) the person or describe the property to be seized: See Attachment B. YOU ARE COMMANDED to execute this warrant on or before November 20, 2017 (not to exceed 14 days) in the daytime 6:00 am. to 10:00 p.111. at any time in the day 01* night because good cause has been established. Unless delayed notice is authorized below; you must give a copy of the warrant and a receipt for the property taken to the person from whom, or from WhOse premises, the propelty Was taken, er leave the copy and at the place Where the property Was taken The of? o?er executing this warrant, or an of?cer present during the execution ?of the warrant inust prepare an inventmy as tequit-ed by law and tetum this Warrant and inventory to Hon Beryl A. Howeli (United States Magistrate Judge) Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3103 31ij, Itind that immediate notification may have an adverse result listed in 18 USS. 2705 (except for delay of trial), and authorize the of?cer exec?uting this warrant to delay notice to the person who, or WhoSe property, will be searched or Seized (checkthe appropriate box) Cl for days (not to exceed 30) El until, the facts justifying the later speci?c date cf Date and time issued: Qf??f'm?W?W] ??f/fil X?f?w W'J'ztdge signature City, and state: Washington, DC Hon, Beryl ,ArHoweli, Chief 0:8. District Judge Printed name and title Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 23 of 105 ma A0 93 (Rev. 11/13) Search and seizure Warrant (Page-2) Return Case No.2 Date and time warrant executed: . Copy of warrant and inventory left with: Inventmy made in the presence of Inventory of the property taken and. name of any persen(s) Seized: Certi?cation I declare under penalty of perjury thatthis inventmy iseorreet and was returned along with the eriginal wanant t6 the designated judge. Date: Executing a?cer .s?fgnature Prfr?triedlnm?? and ri?e Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 24 of 105 ATTACHMENT A This warrant applies to information associated with the Google Mail Account -@gmail.com that is stored at- premises owned, maintained, controlled, or operated by Goo gle, a company headquartered at 1600 Arnphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043. Case Document 48-4 Filled 07/18/19 Page 25 of 105 "We ATTACHMENT I. Information to be disclosed by Google To the extent that the information described in Attachment A is within the posSession, custody, or control of the Google (hereinafter ?the Provider?), regardless of whether such information is stored, held or maintained inside or outside of the United States, and including any emails, records, ?les, logs, or information that have been deleted but are still available to the Provider, the Provider is required to disclose the following information to the government for each account or identi?er listed in Attachment A: a. The contents of all emails associated-with the account, including stored or preserved" copies of emails Sent to and from the account,- draft emails, the source and destination addresses associated with each email, the date and time at which each email was sent, and the size and length of each email; b. All records or other information regarding the identi?cation of the account, to include full name, physical address, telephone numbers and other identi?ers, records of session times and durations, the date on which the account was created, the length of service, the IP address used to register the account, logwin IP addresses associated with seSsiOn times and dates, account status, alternative email addresses provided during registration, methods of? connecting, log ?les, and means and source of payment (including any credit or bank account number); 0. The types of service utilized; d. All records or other stored at any time by an individual using the account, including address books, contact and buddy lists, calendar data, pictures, and ?les; c. All records pertaining to communications between the Provider and any person regarding the account, including contacts with support services and records of actions taken; and other identi?ers, records of session times and durations, the date on which the account was created, the length of service, the types of service utilized, the l? address used to register the account, log-in addresses associated with session times and dates, account status, alternative e-mail addresses provided during registration, all other user names associated with the account, all account names associated with the subscriber, methods of connecting; Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page All search history or web history; All records indicating the services available to subscribers of the accounts; All usernames associated with or sharing a lo gin IP address or broWser cookie with the accounts; All cookies, including third-party cookies, associated with the user; All records that are associated with the machine cookies associated with the user; and All telephone or instrument numbers associated with the Account (including MAC IL Mobile Electronic ta'essty? Numbers Mobile Equipment Identi?er Mobile Identi?cation Numbers subscriber Identity Modules Mobile SubsCriber Integrated Services Digital Network Number International Mobile Subscriber Identi?ers or International Mobile Equipment Identities Information to be Seized by the Government All information described above in Section Ithat constitutes evidence, contraband, fruits, and/or instrumentalities of I violations of 18 U.S.C. 10314 (false statements, to a financial institution), 18 U.S.C. 1343 (Wire fraud), 18 U.S.C. 1344 (bank fraud), and 18 U.S.C. 1956 (money laundering), as well as 18 U.S.C. 951 (acting as an unregistered foreign agent) and the Foreign Agents Registration Act 22 USS. 611 at saga, involving Michael Dean Cohen and occurring on or after line It, 2015, including, for each account or identi?er listed on Attachment A, information pertaining to the following matters: a. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Essential Consultants, Communications, record's, documents, and other files that false representations to a financial institution with relati0n to intended the purpoSe of an account or loan at that ?nancial institution; the nature of any business or entity associated with an account a ?nancial institutibn; the Source of funds flowing into an account; Or the purpose or nature of any ?nancial transactions involving that ?nancial institution; Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 27 of 105 My, ML- 0. Records of any funds or bene?ts received by or offered to Michael Dean Cohen by, or on behalf of, any foreign government, foreign officials, foreign entities, foreign persons, or foreign principals; d. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les that reveal efforts by Michael Dean Cohen to conduct activities on behalf of, for the bene?t of, or at the direction of any foreign government, foreign of?cials, foreign entities, foreign persons, or fOreign principals; e. Evidence indicating how and when the account was accessed or used, to determine to the crimes under investigation and to the account owner; f. Evidence indicating the account oWner?s state of mind as it relates to the crimes 'under investigation; g. The identity of the person(s) who created or used the account, including records that help reveal the whereabouts of such personCs); and h. The identity of any records that help reveal the whereabouts of the cbmmunicatecl With the account about any matters relating to activities conducted by Michael Dean Cohen on behalf of; for the bene?t of, or at the direction of any foreign government, foreign of?cials, foreign entities, foreign persons, or foreign principals. Review Protocols Review of the items described in Attachment A and Attachment 13' shall be conducted pursuant to established procedures designed to collect evidence in a manner consistent with professional responsibility requirements Concerning the maintenance of attorney?client and other operative privileges. When appropriate, the procedures shall include use of a designated ?filter team,? separate and apart from the investigatiVe team, in order to address potential privileges. ?the, "w Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 28 of 105 Exhibit Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page (Rev. 111'] 3) Search and Seizure Warrant 11: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ., for the District of Columbia In the Matter of the Search of (Brie?y describe ti1ep1~operty 1?0 benearched C338: or fdenz?DjJ 1113193113011 by name and address) Assigned T0. - Chief Judge Beryl A. INFORMATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACCOUNT Assign Date: 1111312017 '3 THE Descripti?en Search and Seizure Warrant PREMISES OF 1&1 INTERNET 1N0 3 SEARCH AND SEIZURE WARRANT To: Any authorized 1aw enforcement office1 An application by a federal law enforcement of?cer or an attorney for the government requests the search of the following person 01 property located 1n the Northern District of Caiifornia (identi?l the person 01 1183131156 the pi apart}! to be searched rind?give ifs location): See Attachment A. I 1? 1111 that the af?davitCs-J, or any recorded testimony, establish probable cause to Search and seize the person or property described above, and that such search will reveal ?denryj: 1112133111011 01 desci ib? the proper 1y (0 be 521;: ed): See Attachment B. YOU ARE GOMMANDED to execute this warrant on or before November 20, 2017 (no; toegrceed 14 days) [if in the daytime 6:00am. to 10:00 p.111. 1:1 at. any time in the day orni-ght because good cause has been established. Unless delayed notice is authorized below, you must give a copy of the warrant and a receipt for the ploper'ty taken to the person from w,h01n 01 from whose premiSes, the property was taken or leave the copy and receipt at the plaice whe1e the propelty was taken. The of?cer executing this warrant, or an officer present during the execution of the walrant, must prepare an inventory as required bylaw and this warrant and inventory to - 1 Hon; .Ber?yl A. HoWell . Waited'Stdteis Magistrate Judge) El Pursuant to 18 -.S C. 3103a(b), 1 ?nd that immediate noti?cation may have an adverse result listed In 18 S. C. 2705 [except for delay of trial), and authotize the of?eel executing this Warrant to delay notice to the person who or whose pLOpelty; W111 be 362110th 01? seized (Check the appiopriate 271311,} fot days (110110 exceed 30) El until the facts jnstiiying, the 12111.31 speci?c date of Date and time iSSLted: ffg/ ,gl/ (f1, [If-1? Judge' 5 signrn?w City and state: Washington, DC 1 Hon. Beryl A. Howe?, enter us- Dietrlot Judge - Printed name (1111:111er Case Documents48-4 Filed?O7/18/19 Page 30 of 105 A0 93 (Rev. 11/13) Search and Seizure Warrant (Page 2) Return Case No.: Date and time warrant executed: Copy of war-rant and left with: Inventory made in the presence of Inventory of the property taken and narfi?e of any person(s) seized: . Certi?cation I declare under penalty of perjury that this inventory is correct and was returned along with the original warrant to the designated judge. Date: Executing o?z?cer signature Pr?int?d name and rifle Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 31 of 105 ATTACHNIEN A This warrant applies to information associated with the email'-_ that is stored 'at premises owned,- maintained, controlled, or operated by 1&1 Internet, Inc. an electronic communication and/or remote computing service provider headquartered in Sunnyvale, California. Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 32 of 105 ATTACHMENT Information to be disclosed by 1&1 To the extent that the infonnation deseribed in Attachment A is within the possession, . custody, or control of the 1&1 (hereinafter ?the Provider?), regardless of whether such information is stered, held or maintained inside or outside of the United States, and including any emails, records, tiles, logs, or information that have been deleted but are still available to the Provider, the Provider is required to disclose the following information to the government for each account or identi?er listedin Attachment A: 7, vmmw?w? a. The contents of all emails associated with the account, including stored or preserved copies of emails sent to and from the account, draft emails, the source and destination addresses associated with each email, the date and time at which each email wassent, and the size and length of each email; All records or other information regarding the identi?cation of the account, to include full name, physical address, telephone numbers and other identi?ers, records of?session times and durations, the date on which the account was created, the length of service, the IP address used to registerthe account, logic IP addresses associated with session times and dates, account status, alternative email addresses provided during registration, methods of cennecting, log; ?les, and means and source of payment (including any creditor bank account number); The types of service utilized; All records or other information stored at any time by an individual using the account, including address books, contact and buddy lists, calendar data, pictures, and files; All records pertaining to communications between the Provider and any person regarding the account, including contacts with support services and records of- actions -taken; and other identi?ers, records of session times and duraticns, the date on which the account was created, the length ofservice,.the types of service utilized, the IP address used to register the account, logwin IP addresses associated with Session times and dates, account status, alternative .e-mail addresses provided during registration, all other user names associated with the account, all account names associated with the subscriber, methods of connecting; Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 33 of 105 (my. All search history or web history; All records indicating the sewices available to subscribers of the accounts; All usernames associated with or sharing a login IP address or browser cookie With the accounts; I All cookies, including third?party ecokies, associated with the user; All records that are associated with the machine cookies associated with the user; and All telephone or instrument numbers associated with the Account (including MAC II. addresses, metastases "names Merits Electronicml'?derititym Numbers Mobile Equipment identi?er Mobile Identi?cation Numbers Subscriber Identity Modules Mobile subscriber integrated Services Digital Network Number International Mobile SubScriber Identi?ers or International Mobile Equipment Identities Information to be Seized by the Government All information described above in Section I that constitutes evidence, contraband, fruits, and/or instrumentalities of violations of 18 U.S.C. 1014 (false statements to a ?nancial U.S.C. 1343 (wire fraud), 18 USC. 1344 (bank fraud), and 18 U.S.C. 1956 (money laundering), as well as 18 11.3.0. 951 (acting as an unregistered foreign agent) and the FOreign Agents Registration Act 22 U.S.C.. 611 et seq, involving Michael Dean Cohen, including, for each account or identi?er listed on Attachment A, information pertaining to the fellowing matters: .a'I Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Essential Consultants, Communications, records, documents, and other ?les that false representations to a financial institution with relation to intended the purpose of an or loan at that ?nancial institution; the nature of any business or entity assOciated with and account a financial institution; the source of funds ?owing into an aCcount; or the put?p?ose or nature of any ?nancial transactions involving that financial institution; Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 34 of 105 Records of any funds or bene?ts received by or offered to Michael Dean Cohen by, or on behalf of, any foreign government, foreign official-s, foreign entities, foreign per-sons, or foreign principals; Communications, records, documents, and other files that reveal efforts by Michael Dean Cohen to conduct activities on behalf of, for the bene?t of, or at the direction "of any foreign government, foreign of?cials, foreign entities, foreign persons, or foreign principals; Evidence indicating how and when the account was accessed or used, to determine context (Sf?account access, use, and events relating to the crimes under investigation and to the account owner; Evidence indicating the account owner?s state of mind as it relates to the crimes under investigation; The identity of the person(s) who created or used the account, including records that help reveal the whereabouts of such person(s); and The identity of any records that help reveal the whereabouts of the communiCated with the account about any matters relating to activities conducted by Michael Dean Cohen on behalf of, for the benefit of, or at the direction of any foreign government, foreign of?cials, foreign entities, foreign persons, or foreign principals, Review Protocols Review of the items described in Attachment A and Attachment shall be conducted pursuant to established procedures designed to collect evidence in a manner consistent with professiOnal responsibility requirements concerning the maintenance of attorney-client and other Operative privileges. When appropriate, the procedures shall include use. of a designated ??lter team,? separate and apart from the investigative team, in order to address potential privileges. Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 35 of 105 Exhibit Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 36 of 105 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In the Matter of a Warrant for All Content and Other Information TO BE FILED UNDER SEAL A ?minted With the Email Accounts @gmailcom, AGENT AFFIDAVIT Maintained at Premises Controlled by Google, Inc., the Email Account Maintained at Premises Controlled by ., ,Ir mum ., - maintained at Premises Controlled by 1 Internet, Inc., USAO Reference No. 2018R00 127 Agent Affidavit in Support of Application for a Search Warrant for Stored Electronic Communications STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK i SS. Special Agent _of the United States Attorney?s Of?ce for the Southern District of New York, being duly sworn, deposes and states: I. Introduction A. Affiant l. I am a Special Agent with the United States Attorney?s Office for the Southern District of New York (the I have been a Special Agent with the USAO 'since August 2016. I previously served as a Special Agent with the United States Department of Labor Inspector General from May 2011 to August 2016. In the course of my experience and training in these positions, I have participated in criminal investigations into federal offenses involving a Wide array Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 37 of 105 of ?nancial crimes, including frauds on ?nancial institutions. I also have training and experience executing search warrants, including those authorizing the search of email accounts. B. The Provider, the Subject Account and the Subject Offenses 2. I make this af?davit in support of an application for a search warrant pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703 for all content and other information associated with the email accounts _@gmail.com (the ?Cohen Account?), (the Account?), and -@aol.com (the -Accoun?) (collectively, the ?Subject Accounts?). The Cohen Account, ?Account, and? Account are maintained and controlled by Google, Inc, headquartered at 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, California 94043 (?Google?), the Account is maintained and controlled by 1 1 Internet, Inc., headquartered at 701 Lee Road, Suite 300, Chesterbrook, 19087 and the-chount is maintained and controlled by Oath, Inc., 22000 AOL Way, Dulles, Virginia 20166 (?Oath?) (together, the ?Providers?). The information to be searched is described in the following paragraphs and in Attachments A, B, and to the proposed warrants. I 3. As detailed below, there is probable cause to believe that the Subject Accounts contain evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of violations of 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to defraud the United States), 1005 (false bank entries), 1014 (false statements to a ?nancial institution), 1343 (wire fraud), and 1344 (bank fraud) (collectively, the ?Subject Offenses?). The Target Subjects of this investigation are MICHAEL COHEN (?Cohen?) and others known and unknown. This af?davit is based upon my personal knowledge, my review of documents produced pursuant to grand jury subpoenas and prior search warrants, my review of interview reports prepared by other law enforcement of?cers, and my conversations with other law enforcement of?cers, as well as 2 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 38 of 105 my training and experience concerning the use of email in criminal activity. Because this af?davit is being submitted for the limited purpose of establishing probable cause, it does not include all the facts Ihave learned during my investigation. Where the contents of documents and the actions, statements, and conversations of others are reported herein, they are reported in substance and in part, except where otherwise indicated. C. Services and Records of the Provider 4. I have learned the followingmabout the Providers: a. The Providers offer email services to the public. In particular, Google permits subscribers to maintain email accounts under the domain name gmail.com. Google also allows a subscriber to maintain email accounts under any domain name under the subscriber?s control. For example, if a subscriber controls the domain name Google enables the subscriber to host any email address under this domain name on servers operated by Google. Oath permits subscribers to maintain email accounts under the domain name aol.com. 1 1 permits subscribers to maintain email accounts under any domain name under the subscriber?s control. For example, if a subscriber controls the domain name 1 1 enables the subscriber to host any email address under this domain name on servers operated by l. A subscriber using the Providers? services can access his or her email account from any computer connected to the Internet. b. The Providers maintain the following records and information with respect to every subscriber account: i. Email contents. In general, any email (which can include attachments such as documents, images, and videos) sent to or from a subscriber?s account, or stored in draft form in the account, is maintained on the Providers? servers unless and until the subscriber deletes the email. If the subscriber does not delete the email, it can remain on the Providers? computers 3 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 39 of 105 inde?nitely. Even if the subscriber deletes the email, it may continue to be available on the Provider?s servers for a certain period Of time. ii. Addressbook. The Providers also allow subscribers to maintain the equivalent of an address book, comprising email addresses and other contact information of other email users. Subscriber and billing information. The Providers collect and maintain username, address, telephone number, and alternate email addresses. The Providers also maintain records concerning the date on which the account was created, the Internet protocol address of the user at the time of account creation, the current status of the account (cg, active or closed), the length of service, and the types of services utilized by the subscriber. Additionally, for paying subscribers, the Providers maintain records of the subscriber?s means and source of payment, including any credit card or bank account number. iv. Transactional information. The Providers also typically retain certain transactional information about the use of each account on its system. This information can include records of login session) times and durations and the methods used to connect to the account (such as logging into the account through the Providers? website). i v. Customer correspondence. The Providers also typically maintain records of any customer service contacts with or about the subscriber, including any inquiries or complaints concerning the subscriber?s account. vi. Search history. Google and Oath also typically maintain records of any search history or web history associated with the subscriber?s accOunt. 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 40 of 105 vii. Associated content. Google also typically maintains content and records relating to the following applications that are associated with its e?mail accounts: (A) ?Google Docs,? which provides document~editing software that can be used to create, share, store, and manage documents online; (B) ?Google Drive,? which enables users to store files on Google servers, where they can be accessed remotely by the user and others; and (C) ?Gchat? or ?Instant Messenger,? which provides a chat interface through which users can communicate with each a message, which provides a chat interface through which users can communicate with each other in real time. Preserved and backup records. The Providers also maintain preserved copies of the foregoing categories of records with respect to an account, for at least 90 days, upon receiving a preservation request from the Government pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703(f). The Providers may also maintain backup copies of the foregoing categories of records pursuant to its own data retention policy. D. Jurisdiction and Authority to Issue warrant 5. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703(a), the Government may require a provider of an electronic communications service or a remote. computing service, such as the Providers, to disclose all stored content and all non?content records or other information pertaining to a subscriber, by obtaining a warrant issued using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. 6. A search warrant under 2703 may be issued by ?any district court of the United States (including a magistrate judge of such a court)? that ?has jurisdiction over the offense being investigated.? 18 U.S.C. 2711(3)(A)(i). 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 41 of 105 7. When the Government obtains records under 2703 pursuant to a search warrant, the Government is not required to notify the subscriber of the existence of the warrant. 18 U.S.C. 2703(a), (3). Additionally, the Government may obtain an order precluding the Provider ?om notifying the subscriber or any other person of the warrant, for such period as the Court deems appropriate, where there is reason to believe that such noti?cation will seriously jeopardize an investigation. 18 U.S.C. 2705(b). WW ~~W~mE7xBrioprApplieations 1111, W, 8. On or about July 18, 2017, in connection with an investigation being conducted by the Of?ce of the Special Counsel the Federal Bureau of Investigation sought and obtained from the Honorable Beryl A. Howell, Chief United States District Judge for the District of Columbia, a search warrant for emails in the Cohen Account "sent or received between January 1, 2016 and July 18, 2017. On or about November 13, 2017, the FBI sought and obtained from Judge Howell search warrants for emails in the Cohen Account sent or received between June 1, 2015 and November 13, 2017, and emails in the Account sent or received between the opening of the account and November 13, 2017. The SCO has since referred certain aspects of their investigation into Cohen to the USAO, which is working with the New York Field Of?ce. As part of that referral, the SCO provided the USAO with emails and other content information obtained pursuant to the search warrants executed by the SCO, which had already been reviewed for privilege.1 As discussed below, this af?davit is based in part on my review of 1 In an abundance of caution, in a separate application the USAO has sought authorization, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 41, to review the emails obtained pursuant to the Prior Cohen Account Warrants for evidence related to certain additional conduct that was not the focus of the Prior Cohen Account Warrants. The emails obtained from the Prior Cohen Account Warrants that relate to that additional conduct do not form a basis for the instant application. 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 42 of 105 responsive materials produced pursuant to the July 18 and November 13, 2017 warrants (the ?Prior Cohen Account Warrants?). 9. On or about November 7, 2017, and January 4, 2018, as well as certain prior dates, the SCO sought and obtained from Judge Howell orders authorizing and extending the installation and use of pen registers and trap and trace devices to record communications sent to or from the Cohen Account. The SCO has provided pen register data obtained pursuant to those orders to the USAO. pursuant to the November 7, 2017 and January 4, 2018 orders (the ?Pen Register Data?). 10. On or about February 16, 2018, the USAO sought and obtained from the Honorable Debra Freeman, United States Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of New York, an order pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703(d) for email header information associated with the Account. This af?davit, as discussed below, is based in part on my review of email header information produced by 1 1 in response to that order (the Header Information?). TI. Probable Cause A. Overview 1 1. The United States Attorney?s Office for the Southern District of New York and FBI are investigating, among other things, a scheme by Target Subject Michael Cohen to defraud multiple banks. Cohen is an attorney who currently holds himself out as the personal attorney for President Donald Trump, and who previously served for over a decade as an executive in the Trump Organization, an international conglomerate with real estate and other holdings. 12. The investigation has revealed that Cohen has made affirmative misrepresentations in and omitted material information from financial statements and other disclosures that Cohen provided to multiple banks in connection with a transaction intended to relieve Cohen of approximately $22 million in debt he owed on taxi medallion loans from the banks. As set forth 7 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19. Page 43 of 105 in detail below, in these ?nancial statements, and in his oral and other written statements to these banks, Cohen appears to have intentionally omitted cash assets that he began receiving in 2017 from new consulting work; (ii) signi?cantly understated his total holdings of cash and ?cash equivalents; and failed to inform the banks from which he was seeking debt relief that he had agreed to make a $3.8 million cash payment to a third party, _in connection with acquisition of the taxi medallions securing Cohen?s debt. By making these loans, and attempted to and had secured proposed agreements from the banks to relieve him of certain repayment obligations worth millions of dollars. 13. Based on my review of emails obtained from the Prior Cohen Account Warrants, MD CPC Header Information, and documents produced pursuant to subpoenas, I have learned that Cohen has used the Cohen Account and/or Account to, among other things, communicate with?and their attorney,- about the proposed transfer of Cohen?s medallions and associated debts; (ii) negotiate a pay?down of the principal amount of the taxi medallion loans; communicate With his accountant about the contents of the false ?nancial statements at issue; and (iv) send those false ?nancial statements Account?Account and -iccount, respectively, to communicate with Cohen about the status of the taxi medallion transaction, and to send relevant ?nancial statements to banks. Accordingly, and as set forth in more detail below, there is probable cause to believe that the Subject Accounts will include evidence of the Subject Offenses. B. Cohen?s Statements to Sterling National Bank 14. As set forth in detail below, in 2014, Cohen, through limited liability corporations controlled by him and his wife, Laura Cohen, entered into a series of loans from Sterling 8 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 44 of 105 National Bank (?Sterling?) and the Melrose Credit Union (?Melrose?), secured by taxi medallions, for approximately $20 million. Though entered into by LLCs, the loans were also secured by personal guarantees in the names of both Cohen and his wife. Over time, as the taxi industry weakened and the medallions were devalued, Cohen sought to renegotiate the terms of those loans and/or relieve himself from their obligations, including the personal guarantees. As part of that effort, Cohen made a series of representations to Sterling and Melrose about his net worth, assets, Sterling and Melrose, and public sources concerning the taxi industry and the value of taxi medallions, as well as my review of reports prepared by law enforcement of?cers of interviews with a Sterling executive vice-president (the ?Sterling Employee?1?) and my participation in an interview with a Sterling employee (the I have learned, among other things, the following: a. Taxi medallions are small metal plaques af?xed to taxis. Without a medallion, it is illegal to operate a taxi in cities with medallion systems, such as New York City. Cohen and his wife own multiple LLCs that collectively own 32 taxi medallions (each LLC owns two medallions).2 Cohen?s purchase of these New York taxi medallions was originally financed by loans from Capital One Bank, for which the medallions served as collateral. Cohen was not a taxi operator, and leased his medallions to a third party. That third party made payments to Cohen, who in turn used some of those proceeds to pay his loan payments. b. In early 2014, Cohen became a customer of Sterling when he sought to refinance a mortgage on a rental property that he owned. In or around April 2014, Cohen raised with Sterling 2 One of these companies, Mad Dog Cab Corp., was jointly owned by Sondra Cohen, who I believe is Cohen?s mother. 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 45 of 105 the prospect of re?nancing his taxi medallion loans, which were then at Capital One Bank. By in or about September 2014, Cohen began negotiating a lending transaction with Sterling that would allow Cohen to pay off his loans at Capital One and borrow more money from the then?increase in value of the medallions. According to Sterling Employee?l in 2014, prior to the recent upheaval in the taxi industry?as a result of the emergence of ride-sharing services, such as Uber?taxi medallion loans were viewed by banks and investors as safe, short term credits, as the market value by Cohen?were frequently re?nanced at increasing amounts as the value of the medallions rose. According to Sterling Employee-l borrowers typically cashed out the increase in the loan amount and used the additional funds for other purposes. Cohen appears to have followed this approach in 2014, when he agreed to re?nance his medallion loans for approximately $22 million, which? according to letters from Capital One Bank in Sterling?s ?les?was greater than his previous debt at Capital One Bank ($21 million, of which $14.6 million was a line of credit to Cohen). This allowed Cohen to cash out the proceeds from the transaction. 0. Based on my review of records maintained by Sterling, I have learned that on or about December 8, 2014, each of Cohen?s sixteen taxi medallion corporations entered into loan agreements and promissory notes with Sterling for the principal sum of$ 1,375,000, with repayment due on December 8, 2016. Each loan was signed by Michael or Laura Cohen, depending on who was the sole shareholder of the corporation. The loans were also each secured by a security agreement, dated the same day, making the medallions collateral for the notes. To give Sterling additional security, Michael and Laura Cohen signed personal guarantees and confessions of judgment, giving Sterling the right to pursue collection against the Cohens? personal assets were their corporations to default under the loan agreements. In total, Sterling agreed to lend 10 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 46 of 105 approximately $22 million to the Cohens? companies. Pursuant to participation agreements, Sterling transferred 45 percent of that debt to Melrose.3 Under the terms of Sterling?s participation agreements with Melrose, Sterling was precluded from amending or modifying the loans without the consent of Melrose. d. In evaluating Cohen?s requested re?nancing of the taxi medallions, Sterling (and Melrose, consistent with its participation in the deal) conducted due diligence. At Sterling?s (the ?August 2014 Financial Statement?), which indicated that Cohen had $100,740,000 in total assets, $23,550,000 in total liabilities, and a net worth of $77,190,000.4 From my review of a Sterling credit memorandum, dated September 29, 2014, 1 know that Sterling viewed the transaction favorably because, accounting for loan payments, cash ?ows from thelmedallions were projected to be positive, the value of the collateral (as estimated by Sterling) exceeded $42 million, and the net worth of Cohen?who was the direct obligor under the guarantee agreements?was over $77 million. An internal Sterling credit and risk rating analysis report, dated October 20, 2014, recommended approval of the loans for substantially the same reasons. e. Based on my review of records maintained by Sterling and public sources, I have learned that over time, the collateral backing Cohen?s loans (taxi medallions) lessened'in value due to the rise in ride-sharing companies and signi?cant devaluation of taxi medallions. Additionally, Cohen began falling behind on loan payments to Sterling and Melrose. I know from records maintained by Sterling and an interview with Sterling Employee-2 that, beginning in or around 3 Melrose, which had a business principally focused on taxi medallion loans, is now in conservatorship by the National Credit Union Administration 4 Cohen subsequently provided Sterling with a revised statement of ?nancial condition, also dated August 1, 2014, (which reported assets of $99,420,000, total liabilities of $23,550,000, and a net Worth of $75,870,000. 1 1 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 47 of 105 September 2015, Cohen told Sterling, in sum and substance, that the individual leasing Cohen?s medallions had fallen behind in making payments to Cohen, and that as a result, the cash flow from his taxi medallions had been reduced, leaving him with a shortfall of approximately $16,000 each month. For instance, I have reviewed an email from Sterling Employee-2, dated September 9, 2015, summarizing a call with Cohen?which according to the email and toll records for Cohen?s cellphone occurred on September 8, 2015?during which Cohen told Sterling approximately $16,000. In that same email, Sterling Employee?2 commented that despite Cohen?s statements, his personal financial information ?indicate[d] a strong ability to make up the difference in payments.? Cohen, however, according to Sterling Employee-2, pushed the bank for a reduction in Cohen?s payments. f. From my review of records maintained by Sterling and my participation in an interview with Sterling Employee-2, I have learned that Cohen and Sterling Employee-2 spoke again on September 28, 2015, and that during the call Cohen stated, in sum and substance, that the individual to whom Cohen leases the medallions had again reduced payments to Cohen. I know from my review of records maintained by Sterling that bemeen in or about September 2015 and November 2015, Sterling raised the possibility?both internally and with Cohenwf Cohen posting his real estate holdings, personal residence, or some other collateral as additional security for the banks. According to these records, however, Cohen resisted these requests. From my review of loan documents and records maintained by Sterling, I know that in or about November 2015, as a result of Cohen?s representation that he was not earning suf?cient returns on his medallions to cover interest payments, Sterling and Melrose agreed to amend their loans with Cohen by, 12 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 48 of 105 among other things, reducing the interest rate Cohen paid to Melrose and extending the loan maturity date to December 8, 2017. g. Iknow from interviews with Sterling Employee?1 and Sterling Employee?2, as well as emails I have reviewed, that in or about October 2016, Cohen told Sterling Employee?1 that Cohen had a potential buyer of his taxi medallions, named -who would agree to assume Cohen?s debt with Sterling and Melrose. Based on my review of records maintained by -. above, I know that by or before October 2016, Cohen had entered into negotiations to sell his sixteen corporate taxi medallions to - who is a medallion owner and taxi operator, for the balance of the loans, which at the time was $21,376,000. I know from my review of records maintained by Sterling, and my participation in an interview with Sterling Employee?2, that as a condition of the transfer of the medallion loans?and because Sterling was unfamiliar with - -?Sterling requested that Cohen make a substantial principal payment on the loan, of approximately one million dollars, prior to the transfer. Cohen rejected this request initially. But on or about January 3 1, 2017, Cohen told Sterling Employee-1, in sum and substance, that he would make a one million dollar principal reduction payment in order to move forward with the medallion transfer deal with - Indeed, in an email sent from the Cohen Account to Sterling Employee?2 on or about February 22, 2017, Cohen con?rmed that he ?agreed to pay down 1 million from the loan amoun h. Pursuant to the participation agreements between Sterling and Melrose, Sterling was required to secure Melrose?s agreement to participate in the transfer of the taxi medallion debt from Cohen to On or about April 17, 2017, Sterling sent a memorandum to Melrose summarizing the terms of the proposed transaction, and noting the requirement that 13 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 49 of 105 Melrose agree to the terms. On or about May 2, 2017,_emailed Sterling Employee-1 from the?account to inquire about the status of the transaction. Sterling Employee-1 responded t(_1t the _1 Account that Melrose had agreed to the deal, and that Sterling would be sending ?a term sheet shortly. i. In order for the banks to evaluate the proposed transaction fully, they requested the _Account about the ?Cohen Medallion Purchase,? and stated order to proceed with the assumption of Michael?s loans,? Sterling needed certain ?nancial information from?i responded from the _Account, copying _at th<_Account, that he would send a ?nancial statement and tax returns shortly. Additionally, on or about June 7, 2017, Sterling Employee-1 emailed Cohen to 3! request an ?updated personal ?nancial statemen completed jointly with Cohen?s wife, and Cohen?s most recent federal income tax return. On or about June 8, 2017, Cohen emailed Sterling Employee-l from the Cohen Account, attaching a Sterling personal ?nancial statement form that had been ?lled out by hand, which referenced a statement of ?nancial condition, dated May 1, 2017 (the ?May 2017 Financial Statement?), that was also attached. The May 2017 Financial Statement included a cover letter from Cohen?s accountant, Jeffrey Getzel, stating, in sum and substance, that the information in the statement came from Cohen and that Getzel had not con?rmed its accuracy or completeness. The May 2017 Financial Statement stated that Cohen had total assets of $41,955,000, total liabilities of $39,130,000, and a net worth of $2,825,000. The May 2017 Financial Statement indicated that Cohen?s assets were comprised of $1,250,000 in 14 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 50 of 105 cash, $26,155,000 in closely held companies (such as the taxi medallion entities?and his real estate holdings), $3,200,000 in real estate investments, and his $11,000,000 personal residence. j. Based on my review of reports of law enforcement interviews of Sterling Employee-1, I have learned that Sterling Employee?1 reviewed each line of the May 2017 Financial Statement with Cohen to, among other things, verify its accuracy, and Sterling Employee?1 asked Cohen about the cash amount listed on the May 2017 Financial Statement. Cohen stated to Sterling W, W. 7, k. On or about August 16, 2017, Sterling Employee?1 emailed Cohen at the Cohen Account ant?at the?Account, attaching a non?binding term sheet memorializing the potential transaction between Sterling, Melrose, Cohen, and i- On or about August 29, 2017, -emailed Sterling Employee-1 from the - Account, requesting that he be included on ?all future emails to? and/ or - - concerning this matter,? and providing proposed edits to the term sheet. On or about August 30, 2017, Sterling Employee?1 emailed?at the Account, Cohen at the Cohen Account, and - at the-Account, and provided them with a revised term sheet. On or about September 5, 2017, Sterling Employee-1 sent at the _Account, Cohen at the Cohen Account, and -at the -chount a copy of the executed term sheet. According to the term sheet,_would borrow $20,000,000 from Sterling and Melrose, to be secured by the medallions that -was to acquire from Cohen. 1. As part of the agreement, according to the term sheet, $1,265,913 in principal (which is what would remain after the $20,000,000 payment on the outstanding loan balance) would be repaid by Cohen and the two banks, with Cohen paying ?fty percent and the banks dividing the - 15 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 51 of 105 remaining half of the balance. Based on my review of an internal Sterling credit memorandum, dated October 4, 2017, the parties reached a preliminary agreement that Cohen would pay $632,956 of the remaining $1,265,912 principal loan balance, and Sterling and Melrose would absorb $357,167 and $275,789 respectively in the form of charge-offs. According to Sterling Employee? 1, Sterling was willing to divide the repayment of the outstanding principal balance?despite its prior insistence that Cohen make a principal pay?down of at least one million dollars?because insuf?cient liquidity to pay the full outstanding principal balance. As part of the agreement, Sterling and Melrose also agreed to relieve Cohen and his wife of the personal guarantees that they made on behalf 'of the LLCs. Thus, after completing the -:ransaction, Cohen would no longer have had any outstanding obligations to Sterling or Melrose. m. Based on my review of emails sent by Sterling employees, I have learned that because the transaction between the parties was subject to full credit underwriting by Sterling and Melrose (as well as?Melrose?s regulators at NCUA), in August and September 2017, Sterling required and requested additional ?nancial statements for Cohen and its credit underwriting process. In response to Sterling?s requests, on or about October 5, 2017, - -sent from the - Account to a Sterling employee a copy of l- - personal ?nancial statement. The ?nancial statement lists the Account as the email contact for - Additionally, on or about October 5, 2017, Cohen, using the Cohen Account, re-sent Sterling Employee?2 a copy of his May 2017 Financial Statement. A day later, on October 6, 2017, Cohen, using the Cohen Account, emailed Sterling Employee?2 a statement of ?nancial condition, dated September 30, 2017 (the ?September 2017 Financial Statement?). 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 52 of 105 n. Like the May 2017 Financial Statement, the September 2017 Financial Statement included a cover letter from Jeffrey Getzel, Cohen?s accountant, stating, in sum and substance, that the information in the statement came from Cohen, and that Getzel had not con?rmed its accuracy or completeness. The September 2017 Financial Statement stated that Cohen had total assets of $33,430,000, total liabilities of $45,630,000, and a negative net worth of $12,200,000. Notably, unlike Cohen?s May 2017 Financial Statement, the September 2017 Financial Statement Statement indicated that Cohen?s assets were comprised of $1,250,000 in cash, $17,630,000 in 'closely held companies (such as the taxi medallion entities and his real estate holdings), 5 $3,200,000 in real estate investments, and his $11,000,000 personal residence (which, for the first time, he indicated was held in trust). The September 2017 Financial Statement included assets and liabilities not held in Cohen?s name, such as various entities associated with his taxi medallions and some of his real estate investment entities. 0. From my participation in an interview with Sterling Employe e?2, and my review of records maintained by Sterling, I have also learned that at or around the time Cohen provided Sterling with these ?nancial statements?in or around September 2017?Cohen stopped paying loan payments on his taxi medallion loans altogether. According to Sterling Employee? 2, Cohen informed Sterling, in sum and substance, that he had insufficient funds to pay the principal and interest payments on his medallion loans. By in or about December 2017, Sterling and Melrose had not been paid approximately $276,937.92 in principal and interest payments on the medallion loans. Based on Cohen?s ?nancial condition as conveyed in the 5 Notably, the September 2017 Financial Statement valued each of Cohen?s thirty?two New York taxi medallions at approximately $180,187.50, which was considerably less than the $650,000 valuation ascribed to each medallion in the Coher term sheet. 17 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 53 of 105 September 2017 Financial Statement, and his delinquency in making payments to Sterling, among other things, the bank?s credit underwriting committee determined (and memorialized in a December 2017 memorandum) that the Coher_transaction was favorable for the bank - that is, that-would be a better borrower than Cohen. p. On or about December 26, 2017, Sterling sent Cohen a demand letter requesting the immediate receipt of past?due loan payments. On December 29, 2017, Sterling sent Cohen a ,rss?elligr3WW - corporations. Cohen did not make an immediate payment on the loans, but instead sent an e?mail to Sterling Employee?1 on or about January 24, 2018, from the Cohen Account, stating that during the closing of the Cohen-_ transaction, Cohen would ?bring all payments up to date as well as deposit the payoff differential.? Cohen also requested by email sent from the Cohen Account on January 24, 2018, that at the closing of the Cohen??-transaction, Sterling provide a letter stating that all of Cohen?s debts have been satisfied and that Cohen?s personal guarantees of the medallion loans had been terminated. q. The Coher-transaction, however, did not close. On or about January 29, 2018-the-ttorney, emailed attorneys for Sterling from the-Account and stated that ?at this time there is no deal with Michael Cohen. Some of the numbers have changed and we are not prepared to go forward.? I. Based on my participation in the interview with Sterling Employee-2 and my review of records maintained by Sterling, I know that after the Cohen-deal fell apart, Sterling assigned Cohen?s loans to an employee at Sterling who specializes in collecting on defaulting loans (?Sterling From my review of telephone call notes, 1 know that Sterling Employee?3 spoke to Cohen on or about January 30, 2018 about paying down and/or 18 02.23.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 54 of 105 restructuring Cohen?s outstanding taxi medallion loans. Based on my review of an email between Sterling Employee?3 and Cohen, I know that on the January 30, 2018 call, Cohen stated that he would send a ?corrected curren version of his personal ?nancial statement. Following that call, on or about January 31, 2018, Cohen emailed Sterling Employee?3 from the Cohen Account a copy ot the September 2017 Financial Statement. Later that day, Cohen again emailed Sterling Employee?3 from the Cohen Account and proposed paying $500,000 to bring the loans current an :76 0,0 0 a-lrb alanceto?$20 :5 0 0,0 0 0::Gohenralso:su gestederevisedanenth-l?yvrn? interest payment amounts. On or about January 31, 2018, Sterling Employee-3 responded to Cohen at the Cohen Account and stated, in sum and substance, that Cohen would need to pay the entirety of the overdue payments and pay down the principal balance of the loan to $20,000,000 (in total, a payment of approximately $1,750,000), and would need to make larger interest payments. 5. On or about February 1, 2018, Cohen emailed Sterling Employee?3 from the Cohen Account and proposed ?[p]ayment of $1.250m which ALL can be used to pay down principal, if [Sterling] will waive past due amounts,? but stated do NOT have more than the $1.250m.? . (Emphasis in original.) Cohen also stated, in sum and substance, that he had insuf?cient ?nancial resources to post additional collateral or pre?fund payments. Based on my participation in an interview with Sterling Employee?2, I have learned that Sterling continues to renegotiate the medallion loans with Cohen based on Cohen?s representations about his current ?nancial position. 19 02.28.2018 .. Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 55 of 105 C. Cohen Made Material Misrepresentations About His Finances to Banks Cohen Concealed from Sterling and Melrose Cash Derived from Consulting Work 15. As set forth in detail below, despite multiple representations by Cohen to Sterling (and, by extension, Melrose6) that he had insuf?cient funds to pay down the principal balance of the medallion loans, make interest payments, or pay past?due amounts, it appears that between 2016 and the present, Cohen opened and maintained bank accounts at First Republic Bank (E?First med?consulting mm? accounts, which he did not disclose to Sterling. Cohen set up these accounts and received these funds during the very period in which he made disclosures to Sterling about his personal ?nances (including his assets and liabilities) and his ability to make payments on the medallion loans. In these disclosures to Sterling?and despite being asked about these bank accounts by his accountanthohen withheld information about liquid ?nancial assets at First Republic. 16. Speci?cally, based on my review of documents and bank records produced pursuant to a subpoena by First Republic, and my participation in and review of reports of interviews with two First Republic employees, I have learned, among other things, the following: a. Cohen and his wife have been customers of First Republic since approximately June 2011. Cohen controls several checking and loan accounts, some in his own name and others in the names of corporate entities. 6 Based on my review of a rep01t of an interview conducted with an employee of Melrose, 1 have learned that, pursuant to the participation agreement between Sterling and Melrose, Cohen?s ?nancial statements and other records in Sterling?s possession were forwarded to Melrose so that Melrose could make a determination as to whether to approve of the Cohen? transaction. Based on my review of reports of interviews with employees, 1 also know that Cohen called employees at Melrose regarding the Cohen ransaction. 20 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 56 of 105 b. On or about October 26, 2016, in Manhattan, New York, Cohen opened a new checking account at First Republic in the name of Essential Consultants LLC (the ?Essential Consultants Accoun Cohen was the only authorized signatory on the account. When Cohen opened the Essential Consultants Account, a First Republic employee (?First Republic Employee? conducted an in-person interview of Cohen. In response to a series of know?your-customer questions7 about the purpose of the account??the answers to which First Republic Employee?1 Consultants as a real estate consulting company to collect fees for investment consulting work, and all of his consulting clients would be domestic individuals based in the United States. Cohen also stated, in sum and substance, that his purpose in setting up the account was to keep the revenue from his consulting business?which he said was not his main source of income?separate from his personal ?nances. As set forth. below, there is probable cause to believe that Cohen?s statements about the intended purpose of the account and source of funds for the account were false. Speci?cally, the account was not intended to receivewand does not appear to have receivedwmoney in connection with real estate consulting work; in addition, the account has received substantial payments from foreign sources. c. First, on or about October 27, 2016?the day after he opened the Essential Consultants Account, Cohen used the account to wire $130,000 to an account held in the name of attorney Keith Davidson?s law ?rm. Based on my review of emails between Cohen and Davidson, 7 Certain ?nancial institutions are required to conduct such procedures pursuant to the Bank Secrecy Act and its implementing regulations. See 31 U.S.C. 5318; 31 C.F.R. 1020.220. 8 First Republic Employee?1 ?rst ?lled out the form on the day he interviewed Cohen, October 26, 2016. On or about December 19, 2016, at the request of bank compliance personnel, First Republic Employee?1 updated the form to add more detail about Cohen?s statements. 21 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 57 of 105 obtained pursuant to the Prior Cohen Account Warrants, I believe? that this payment did not relate to any real estate consulting work, but rather was a ?settlement? payment made to Davidson?s client. 9 Based on my review of public sources, Ihave learned that Davidson?s client is alleged to . have had an extramarital affair with Donald Trump. On or about February 13, 2018, Cohen made a public statement that a private transaction in 2016, I used my own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to [Davidson?s client].? j: Ghe. duled-. by an FBI forensic accountant that after Cohen opened the Essential Consultants Account, Cohen received payments into that account from foreign businesses and entities that do not re?ect the stated client pro?le for the residential and commercial real?estate consulting services. Speci?cally, from my review of the Essential Consultants Account schedule and public sources, I know the following: i. Beginning on or about January 31, 2017, Cohen began receiving payments of $83,333 from an entity called Columbus Nova LLC, which were deposited into the Essential Consultants Account. According to public sources, Columbus Nova is an investment management ?rm controlled by Renova Group, an industrial holding company based in Zurich, Switzerland that is controlled by Russian national Viktor Vekselberg. From January 2017 to August 2017, the Essential Consultants Account received seven payments totaling $583,332.98 from Columbus Nova LLC. 9 Speci?cally, I have learned from my review of bank records that on or about October 26, 2016, Cohen transferred $131,000 from a home equity line of credit account at First Republic to the Essential Consultants Account; on or about October 27, 2016, Cohen transferred $130,000 from the Essential Consultant Account to an account held in the name of Davidson?s law ?rm at a bank based in Los Angeles; and on or about November 1, 2016, a wire transfer in the amount of approximately $96,645 was made from Davidson?s account to a bank account in the name of Davidson?s client. 22 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 58 of 105? ii. Beginning on or about April 5, 2017, Cohen began receiving payments from Novartis Investments, SARL, which I believe to be the in?house ?nancial subsidiary of the Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis International AG (??Novartisi?). Between April 2017 and January 2018, the Essential Consultants Account received ten wire payments from a Swiss bank account held in the name of Novartis, each in the amount of $99,980, for a total of $999,800. Beginning in or about April 2017, the Essential Consultants Account started Inc. Speci?cally, on or about April 14, 2017, wired $100,000 to the Essential Consultants Account and, ?om in or about June 2017 to in or about January 2018, the Essential Consultants Account received nine $50,000 payments from In total, wired $550,000 to the Essential Consultants Account. iv. On or about May 10, 2017, June 9, 2017, July 10, 2017, and November 27, 2017, the Essential Consultants Account received four deposits in the amount $150,000 (totaling $600,000) from a bank account in South Korea. The account holder from which the money was sent is Korea Aerospace Industries Ltd. KAI is a South Korea-based company that . produces and sells ?xed?wing aircraft, helicopter aircraft, and satellites to the United States Department of Defense, among other customers. v. On or about May 22, 2017, the Essential Consultants Account received a $150,000 deposit from an account at Kazkommertsbank, a Kazakhstani bank. The listed account holder at Kazkommertsbank was a second Kazakhstani bank named BTA Bank, A0. A message accompanying the wire payment indicated that the payment was a consulting fee as per Inv DD May 10, 2017 consulting agreement DD 08 05 2017 CNTR 08/05/2017.? 23 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 59 of 105 vi. In total, from on or about January 31, 2017 to on or about January 10, 2018, the Essential Consultants Account received approximately $2,883,132.98 in transfers and checks from the aforementioned entities. As of on or about January 10, 2018, the balance in the Essential Consultants Account was $1,369,474.23. e. On or about April 4, 2017, Cohen opened another new checking account at First Republic, this one in the name of Michael D. Cohen Associates, PC. (the Accoun ?-WW?wGohenr Account received ten wire transfers and one check from an account in the name of Squire Patton Boggs, a law firm. In total, from on or about April 5, 2017, to on or about January 2, 2018, the Account received $426,097.70 in deposits, and the balance in the account as of January 2, 2018, was $344,541.35. As discussed below, Cohen never disclosed any of the balance in the Essential Consultants or accounts to Sterling during the negotiations with respect to the -7ansaction, including in his May 2017 Financial Statement and September 2017 Financial Statement. 17. Based on my review of emails from the Cohen Account that were seized pursuant to the Prior Cohen Account Warrants, and my review of reports of interviews with employees of and Nevart'is, it appears that the aforementioned payments to the Essential Consultants Account and Account ostensibly were for political consulting work, including consulting for international clients on issues pending before the Trump administration.10 Speci?cally, from my review of emails from the Cohen Account and public soUrces, I have learned the following: 10 Based on my review of public sources, I have learned that Cohen is not registered as a lobbyist or as a person acting as an agent of foreign principals, as may have been required by the Foreign Agents Registration Act. 24 02.23.2013 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 60 of 105 a. On or about April 28, 2017, Cohen sent an email from the Cohen Account to an individual whom I believe is af?liated with KAI. In the email, Cohen attached a document purporting to be a ?Consulting Agreement? between KAI and Essential Consultants dated as of about May 1, 2017. The document indicates that Essential Consultants would render ?consulting and advisory services, as requested? by KAI, and that KAI would pay Essential Consultants ?a consulting fee of One Million Two Hundred Thousand US Dollars,? disbursed WW b. On or about May 10, 2017, Cohen sent an email from an alternate email address, copying the Cohen Account, to an employee of BTA Bank. To the email, Cohen attached an invoice to BTA Bank in the name of Essential Consultants. The invoice contemplated a $150,000 payment to Essential Consultants for a consulting fee.? 0. On or about February 13, 2017, Cohen emailed an employee from the Cohen Account what appears to be a consulting agreement, which contemplates that Essential Consultants ?shall render consulting and advisory services to and that would ?advise [Essential Consultants] of those issues and matters with respect to which Services desires [Essential Consultants]?s assistance and advice.? The contract calls for ?to pay the Consultant for his services . . . a consulting fee of Fifty Thousand ($50,000) Dollars . . . per month.? Based on my review of reports of interviews with employees, I have learned that retained Cohen to consult on political issues, including net neutrality, the merger between and Time Warner, and tax reform. d. On or about January 17, 2017, Cohen emailed to a representative of Novartis from the Cohen Account a contract between Novartis and Essential Consultants, which provides that Essential Consultants will ?provide consulting and advisory services to Novartis on matters that 25 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 61 of 105 relate to the repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act in the US and any other issues mutually agreeable to [Essential Consultants] and Novartis.? The contract provides for a ?consulting fee of One Million Two Hundred Thousand ($1,200,000) US dollars,? to be paid to Essential Consultants in even installments over the course of a year. Based on my review of reports of interviews with Novartis employees, I have learned that Novartis retained Cohen to provide political consulting services and to gain access to relevant policymakers in the Trump W, ,7 a, e. On or about April 3, 2017, Squire Patton Boggs, a law ?rm, announced on its website that is had formed a ?strategic alliance? with Michael D. Cohen Associates and would ?jointly represent clients.? 18. Despite the signi?cant amount of money that Cohen received into the Essential Consultants Account and the Account, and the cash balance in both accounts, Cohen did not disclose that information to Sterling or Melrose. Speci?cally, based on my review of documents provided by Getzel, and my review of notes an__ I have learned the following: a. In or about May 2017, Getzel met with Cohen at a law ?rm in Manhattan, New YOrk. At the meeting, Cohen told Getzel, in sum and substance, that he had set up a law practice called Michael D. Cohen Associates RC, and a consulting comp any called Essential Consultants LLC. Cohen told Getzel, in sum and substance, that he expected to earn $75,000 per month in connection with his law practice, and that he expected gross revenues for the consulting business to be between ?ve and siX million dollars annually. b. In or about October 2017, if not earlier, Getzel was preparing a personal ?nancial statement for Cohen. On or about October 6, 2017, Getzel sent an email to Cohen at the Cohen 26 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 62 of 105 Account in which Getzel wrote that ?[a]ttached is a draft of the new PFS as of September 30, 2017? and attached a draft of the September 2017 Financial Statement. The draft statement re?ected that as of September 30, 2017, Cohen had only $1,250,000 in cash, total assets of approximately $33,430,000 (comprised of taxi medallion interests, real estate interests, and his personal residence and property), and liabilities of approximately $45,630,000, leaving him purportedly over $12 million in debt. In the same email, Getzel questioned Cohen, in sum and substance, about the fact Account or the Account: did not add any value for you[r] two operating entities Michael D. Cohen Associates POC [Sic] and Essential Consultants LLC. Please advise whether or not these should be disclosed and what value.? c. On or about October 6, 2017, Cohen called Getzel by telephone??which is re?ected on toll records for Cohen?s cellphone?and told Getzel, in sum and substance, not to include Essential Consultants or in the September 2017 Financial Statement because they had no value. d. On or about October 6, 2017, following the call with Getzel, Cohen, using the Cohen 1 Account, responded to Getzel?s email with the answer good to me.? Cohen never directed Getzel to make any changes to his cash position as listed in the September 2017 Financial Statement. Neither Essential Consultants nor was listed on the September 2017 Financial Statement that was provided to Sterling. 19. Based on the foregoing, and from my review of bank records and emails sent by Cohen to Sterling, I know that the September 2017 Financial Statement made no mention whatsoever of assets that Cohen held in the Essential Consultants Account or the Account. As of September 30, 2017?the date of the September 2017 Financial Statement?Cohen had 27 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 63 of 105 approximately $673,729.95 in the Essential Consultants Account and $24 8,619.28 in the ?Account. As of October 6, 2017, the date when Getzel asked Cohen about the two accounts, Cohen had approximately $823,709.95 in the Essential Consultants Account and $248,619.28 in the Account. Cohen Understated His Available Cash 20. In addition to withholding the existence of the Essential Consultants Account and the his available cash and cash equivalents in his ?nancial disclosures. Speci?cally, I know from my review of the September 2017 Financial Statement that Cohen provided to Sterling that Cohen represented that he had $1,250,000 in cash as of September 30, 2017. But, from my review of a summary of bank records that were scheduled by an FBI forensic accountant, I have learned that Cohen had over $5,000,000 in cash and cash equivalents as of September 30, 2017. Speci?cally, from my review of the account schedule and bank records, I have learned the following: a. Cohen has three checking and/or savings accounts at Capital One Bank, one of which is in his wife?s name. As of September 30, 2017, Cohen had $1,105,680.35 in his savings account, and $1,262,982.29 in total in the three accounts at Capital One Bank. b. Cohen has three accounts at Morgan Stanley in his name. As of September 30, 2017, the combined total in cash and cash equivalents in those three accounts was $1,270,600.41. c. As of September 30, 2017, Cohen had $260,689.18 in an account at Signature Bank. (1. In addition to the Essential Consultants Account and Account at First Republic, Cohen also had two joint checking accounts with Laura Cohen at First Republic. In total, as of September 30, 2017, Cohen had at least $1,876,209.27 in total in his four accounts at First Republic. 28 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 64 of 105 e. Cohen has an account at Bethpage Credit Union with $25,931.39 in it as of September 30, 2017. f. As of September 30, 2017, Cohen had $17,542.54 in accounts at Sterling. g. Cohen has two accounts at TD Bank?one in his name and one held jointly with his wife~??and the total balance across the two accounts as of September 30, 2017 was $300,096.72. h. In total, as of September 30, 2017, Cohen had at least $5,014,051.80 in his accounts ank;:B ethp Morgan Stanley. 21. Accordingly, based on the foregoing, it appears that Cohen?s representations to Sterling and Melrose that he did not have more than $1,250,000 were false, and that Cohen withheld information regarding approximately $5 million in funds from Sterling and Melrose in order to secure favorable terms in his renegotiation of his medallion loan. Based on my participation in an interview with Sterling Employee-2, and my review of reports of interviews with Sterling Employee-1 and two Melrose employees, it is my understanding that that Sterling and Melrose would View Cohen?s understating of his assets as material to its decision whether to renegotiate Cohen?s medallion loans and on what terms, or approve of the transfer of those loans to Cohen Had a Side Agreement With- 22. As set forth in detail below, it appears that during the course of Cohen?s negotiations to sell his interest in taxi medallions and the associated debt to_Cohen not only misrepresented his financial position to Sterling, but also failed to disclose a side deal he had negotiated with - it appears that -1greed to pay an above?market price for Cohen?s taxi cab medallions, and in exchange, Cohen agreed to pay _pproximately 29 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 65 of 105 $3.8 million in cash. Speci?cally, from my review of documents produced pursuant to a subpoena by Sterling, and reports prepared by law enforcement of?cers of interviews with Sterling Employee-1, as well as my participation in an interview with Sterling Employee?2, I have learned, among other things, the following: a. On or about September 5, 2017, an executed term sheet was circulated by Sterling Employee-1 to Cohen and - See supra 11 14(k). According to the term sheet, - that _Nas to acquire from Cohen. At a price of $20 million for thirty-two taxi medallions, I the proposed transaction valued each medallion as worth $625 ,000. The term sheet also contemplated a $1,265,913 pay?down of the principal balance of the loan. The term sheet made no mention of a $3.8 million payment from Cohen to _or any other form of payment or ?nancial transaction between the parties. b. Additionally, an internal Sterling credit memorandum, dated October 4, 2017, describing the terms of the Cohen-?-transaction and the new loan to _did not mention any payments from Cohen to including a $3.8 million payment. The memorandum also noted that the ?loan amount of indicates a purchase price per medallion? but ?it is recognized that this is not in line with current market values.? Indeed, according to an internal Sterling memorandum dated February 5, 2018, in the month of January 2018, taxi medallions sold for amounts ranging from $120,000 to $372,000. According to Sterling Employee?1 and Sterling Employee?2, they were never told that- agreed to a purchase price of $625,000 in exchange for a lump sum payment from Cohen, or that Cohen would make any payment to - 30 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 66 of 105 23. While Cohen and_ did not disclose any payment from Cohen to _in communications with Sterling, it appears that such a payment was contemplated. Indeed, based on my review of records maintained by Getzel, and a report prepared by law enforcement agents of an interview with Getzel, I have learned the following, in substance and in part, regarding the proposed side-payment from Cohen to -: a. On or about September 19, 2017, Getzel prepared a memorandum for Cohen 7:33:72: 2::Tentitle dgr??S and:]3 ebtrAs sumpt-ionl?: ether? A The Getzel Memorandum summarized the proposed transaction between Cohen and- in part, as follows: ?Michael and Laura Cohen will transfer ownership of their 13 NYC medallion entities to a Buyer who will assume their bank indebtedness, upon the [Cohens?] paying down the debt portfolio of the 13 entities by $500,000 and a cash payment to the Buyer of b. According to Getzel, Cohen told him the parameters of the deal, including the payment of $3,800,000 to - but Getzel did not know where Cohen was going to obtain $3,800,000 to pay_ As noted above, Cohen had more than $5,000,000 in cash and cash equivalents as of September 2017, but had only disclosed in his September 2017 Financial Statement that he had $1.25 million in cash. 24. Based on my review of records maintained by Sterling (as well as Melrose, the bank with the participating interest in the loans) and reports of interviews of representatives of Sterling (and Melrose), I have seen no evidence that Sterling, Melrose, or any other ?nancial institution involved in the potential deal with Cohen and '-was aware of the planned $3.8 million side payment from Cohen to - 11 The reference to thirteen medallions appears to be an error by Getzel. Cohen and his wife together owned sixteen corporations, which in turn owned 32 taxi medallions. 31 02.23.2013 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 67 of 105 D. Probable Cause Regarding the Subject Accounts 25. As set forth above, since at least September 2015, if not earlier, Cohen has told Sterling that he has dif?culty making payments on his medallion loans and, since at least October 2016, Cohen has been actively engaged in an attempt to sell his taxi medallions and the associated debts tc?t In the course of doing so, Cohen has used the Cohen Account and/or Account to engage in email communications regarding the terms of the transactions and the 010 ide=p?yment ~Wwith '73" -1t the-Account, and i- at the-Account. Speci?cally, as described above, there is probable cause to believe that the Subject Accounts have been used regarding the proposed Cohen- transaction with Sterling: a. Cohen has used the Cohen Account to, among other things, negotiate a pay?down of the principal amount of the loan, see supra 11 14(g), to send term sheets to Sterling, see supra Tl 140), to communicate with his accountant about the contents of ?nancial statements, see supra Ti 16, to send ?nancial statements to Sterling, see supra 14(i), to check on the status of the transaction as of January 24, 2018, see supra Tl 14(n), to negotiate a reduction of his debt with Sterling on or around January 31, 2018, see supra 11 14(0), to tell Sterling on February 1, 2018, he does not have the ability to pay more than $1,25 0,000, see supra 14(p), and to communicate with individuals responsible for sources of payments to the Essential Consultants Account, see supra Tl 15. In other words, from the communications described above, it appears likely that the Cohen Account will contain recent evidence of the Subject Offenses, including communications and potential misrepresentations to Sterling, and evidence indicating that statements made to Sterling are false or misleading. b. _has used the _Alccount to communicate about the proposed taxi medallion transaction with Cohen, which appears to have been discussed as early 32 02.28.2013 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 68 of 105 as October 2016. See supra 1] 14(g). 12 Speci?cally, as described above, as early as May 2, 2017, _used the?Account to inquire about the status of the transaction, see supra 11 14(h). He used the _Account to exchange drafts of the proposed term sheet with Cohen-and Sterling, see supra 11 140). The .?Account was also used by i-to send a personal ?nancial statement for?to Sterling, see supra 1] 14(1). The?Account was copied on emails from the statement as the contact email fo:_ see supra 1i 14(m). Additionally, based on my review of Header Information, I know that on or about September 1, 2017?at or around the time the_; and Cohen were negotiating a term sheet?_used the _chount to send and receive eight emails from Cohen at the Account. c. -has used the-recount to communicate with Sterling employees, Cohen, and?Lbout the proposed taxi medallion transaction since at least December 2016. See supra 14(g), 24(c). Speci?cally, on or about August 29, 2017, -:old Sterling that he should be included on ?all future e-mails? involving the proposed transaction, see supra ii 140). Additionally, i-vas involved in making revisions to the parties? term sheets, and he told Sterling on January 29, 2018 that-vould not go forward with the planned transaction, see supra 140), (11). Accordingly, there is probable cause to believe that the -Account will contain evidence of the negotiations between Sterling and the parties, evidence of a payment from Cohen to- and the reasons for the collapse of the Cohen?_transaction. 12 For instance, from records provided by Sterling, I know that on or about December 2, 2016,?sent an email to a Sterling employee using the. Account. The email forwarded correspondence between who was using the - Account, and an employee of Capital One regarding extending )an with Capital One. 33 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 69 of 105 26. Additionally, it appears that Cohen set up the Account to receive emails he .was previously receiving at the Cohen Account. Specifically, based on my review of records maintained by I have learned that on or about May 5, 2017, Cohen sent an email from the Account to a blind copy list of recipients stating that ?[d]ue to the overwhelming volume of phone calls and emails coming into my previous cellular number and email address, I have elected to create for Clients Only the following. Kindly use this new information for all future and ?Michael D. Cohen Associates, as well as the Account as the email address. 13 27. In addition, based on my review of emails from the Account produced pursuant to the Prior Cohen Account Warrants and the Header Information, Ihave learned that Cohen has used the Account to send and receive emails from the Cohen Account, to communicate with the .kccount, and to send and receive emails from other email accounts about this political consulting business. Additionally, from my review of the Header Information, it appears that since the November 13, 2017 search warrant on the Account, Cohen has continued to send and receive emails at the Account that appear likely to be relevant to the commission of the Subject Offenses. For example, emails obtained pursuant to the Prior Cohen Account Warrants, as well as the Header Information have revealed the following: a. On approximately eight occasions in August and September 2017, while Cohen,? _were communicating about a term sheet for the Cohen-taxi 13 Based on my review of emails from the Account obtained pursuant to subpoena, I have learned that Cohen has used the account to communicate with numerous individuals with whom he does not enjoy an attorney?client privilege, including some of the individuals described below. See infra 1] 27. 34 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 70 of 105 medallion transaction, see supra 14(k), Cohen used the Account to send or receive emails fron-at the -Alccount. For instance, on or about August 22, 2017, -used the-Account to send an email to Sterling Employee~1 and copied Cohen on the email at the MD CPC Account. On the same day, Sterling Employee-l responded tc-t the Z-chount and Cohen at the Account. On or about August 22, 2017, Cohen also used the Account to send an email to Sterling Lint?mm v- ?v to send or receive eight emails with the 2-5iccount. c. Cohen used the Account to send and receive emails from individuals who work at companies with whom it appears Cohen has a political consulting agreement. For example, beginning in April 2017?the same month when Cohen began receiving payments from see supra 16(d), used the Account to send and receive emails from employees. These emails contain, among other things, invoices from Cohen to for consulting work by Cohen. Similarly, beginning in April 2017thich is also the month Cohen began receiving payments from Novartis for consulting work, see supra 16(d), 17(d)W Cohen used the Account to send and receive emails from employees of Novartis. These emails concern, among other things, invoices from Cohen and requests for Novartis for Cohen?s assistance on an initiative relating to drug pricing. d. From my review of the Header Information, I have learned that Cohen has continued to use the Account to send and receive emails from individuals who work at companies with whom it appears Cohen had a political consulting agreement, such as Novartis and For instance, on approximately six occasions between November 28, 2017 and January 30, 2018, the Account was used to send and receive emails from accounts belonging to 35 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 71 of 105 individuals using @att.com email addresses. Similarly, on approximately seventeen occasions between December 1, 2017 and February 20, 2018, the Account was used to send and receive emails from accounts belonging to individuals using @novartis.com email addresses. Since November 15, 2017, the Account has also sent and received emails with individuals using the email domains @bta.kz, which I believe is the email domain used by employees of BTA Bank, see supra 1111 16(d), 17(b), and @squirepb.com, which I believe is the email domain used by employees of the lawwfirwrn which Cohen appears to have a consulting relationship with, see Supra 1W 16(e), 17(e). Accordingly, it appears that Cohen continues to use the Account to send and receive emails that will be relevant to whether he is maintaining a consulting business, what type of consulting work he is doing, and whether he is receiving money for that consulting work. 28. In addition to the foregoing, based on my review of the Pen Register Data, see supra 11 9, it appears that since the date of the last search warrant on the Cohen Account (123., November 13, 2017), Cohen has continued to use the Cohen Account to communicate with the - - Account, the-Account, and other email accounts that appear likely to be relevant to the commission of the Subject Offenses described above. For example, the Pen Register Data has revealed the following: a. Emails sent by the Cohen Account to the -chount on- or about December 18, 2017 at 8:26 December 21, 2017 at 9:35 December 22, 2017 at 4:32 January 3, 2018 at 8:01 January 3, 2018 at 2:56 and January 4, 2018 at 3:31 pm. b. An email sent by the Cohen Account to the_ Account on or about January 25, 2018 at 8:55 pm. 36 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 72 of 105 c. Emails from the Cohen Account to the email account_ on or about December 1, 2017 at 2:14 December 29,2017 at 10:20pm, January 2, 2018 at 3:52 January 2, 2018 at 5:44 and January 8, 2018 at 6:38 pm. Based upon my review of emails contained in the Cohen Account, I have learned that 12116?1 email account belongs to Jeffrey Getzel, Cohen?s accountant, through whom Cohen made misrepresentations to ?nancial institutions, as discussed above. including Sterling Employee-1, on or about January 25, 2018 at 10:23 January 26, 2018 at 12:55 am, January 29, 2018 at 5:30 January 29,2018 at 8:29 January 30, 2018 at 6:44 pm. e. An email sent ?om the Cohen Account to the email account on or about January 25, 2018 at 5:29 pm. As stated above, First Republic is the bank at which the Essential Consultants Account is held. f. Numerous emails sent from the Cohen Account to the email account including emails on or about December 4, 2017 at 2: 17 pm. and January 29, 2018 at 5 :43 pm. Based upon the email address and domain name, as well as my review of reports of interviews and documents re?ecting that Cohen?s taxi medallions were leased and operated by believe that the _email address belongs to 29. Based on my review of records maintained by Sterling, I know that Cohen used the Cohen Account to send and receive documents related to the Cohen-- transaction. Based on my training and experience, Iknow that Google allows users of e?mail accounts to easily save documents to file sharing and retention platforms such as Google Docs and Google Drive. I 37 02.28.2018 WW Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 73 of 105 also know, from my training and experience, that users of email accounts often use instant messaging interfaces linked to their email accounts. Further, I have learned that the Providers maintain records of search and web histories associated with email accounts and, based on my training and experience, users of e?mail accounts use associated web search browsers associated with a subscriber?s account to research topics they are e~mailing about. Accordingly, there is probable cause to believe that content information associated with the Subject Accounts will also contain evidencerelate?d?ito?fh'e: WW 30. Thus, I respectfully submit that there is probable cause to believe that emails and other content information from the Subject Accounts will contain evidence of Cohen?s efforts to sell his taxi medallions and the associated debt, and his misrepresentations and omissions to Sterling and Melrose in connection with these negotiations. Although Cohen appears to have communicated with?primarily through the Cohen Account and Account, I know, based on my involvement in the investigation, that Cohen also used at least one other email account associated with his position at the Trump Organization. Thus, I respectfully submit that there is probable cause to believe that emails and other content information from th_chount, _Account and-Account since on or about October 1, 2016?the approximate date of when Cohen?s efforts to sell his taxi medallions and the associated debt beganwwill re?ect communications with the Cohen Account, Account, and possibly one or more additional accounts used by Cohen, and probable cause to believe that such emails will constitute evidence of Cohen?s commission of the Subject Offenses, including the extent to which Cohen did or did not inform other individuals involved in the conduct described above??such as??of his misstatements and omissions to financial institutions. 3 8 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 74 of 105 31. Temporal Limitation. This application seeks all emails and other requested content information specified in Attachments A, B, C, and for the following periods: a. For the Cohen Account, this application seeks all emails sent, created, or received between November 14, 2017, and the date of the proposed warrant, inclusive. As described above, pursuant to the Prior Cohen Account Warrants, the SCO obtained and provided to the USAO emails from the Cohen Account that were sent, created, or received before November 14, 2017. "i?i?rt that was created between December 1, 2014 (the month when Cohen entered into the medallion loans with Sterling), and the date of the proposed warrant, inclusive. b. For the Account, this application seeks all emails sent, created, or received between November 14, 2017, and the date of the proposed warrant, inclusive. As described above, pursuant to a prior warrant, the SCO obtained and provided to the USAO emails from the Account that were sent, created, or received before November 14, 2017. c. For the_ Account and _Account, this application seeks emails and all other content information specified above sent, created, or received between October 1, 2016, and the date of the proposed warrant, inclusive. As described above, October 2016 is the month in which Cohen began negotiating the taxi medallion sale with the - d. For the _Account, this application seeks emails and all other content information speci?ed above sent, created, or received between December 1, 2016, and the date of the proposed warrant, inclusive. As described above, December 2016 is the month in which- began representing the-in relation to the taxi medallion transaction. E. Evidence, Fruits and Instrumentalities 32. Based upon the foregoing, I respectfully submit there is probable cause to believe that information stored on Google?s servers associated with the Cohen AcCount will contain evidence, . 39 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 75 of 105 fruits, and instrumentalities of violations of the Subject Offenses, as more fully described in Section II of Attachment A to the proposed warrant for the Cohen Account and Account, including the following: a. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les necessary to establish the identity of the person(s) who created or used the Cohen Account or Account. b. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Sterling, MelroseCommunications, records, documents, and other ?les involving a plan, proposal, or agreement for Cohen and/ or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to others, including to and/or entities associated with him; d. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Essential Consultants, LLC or Michael D. Cohen Associates, including those which indicate the nature and purpose of payments made to or from Essential Consultants or Michael D. Cohen Associates; e. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les necessary to establish the identity of any person(s) - including records that reveal the whereabouts of the person(s) who communicated with the Cohen Account and/or Account about any matters relating to Essential Consultants, LLC, or about any plan or proposal or agreement for Cohen and/or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to others, including to _1nd/or entities associated with him; f. Communications between the Cohen Account and/or MD CPC Account and Jeffrey Getzel relating to Cohen?s bank accounts, taxes, debts, and/or ?nances; 40 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 76 of 105 g. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les re?ecting false representations to a ?nancial institution with relation to the intended purpose of an account or loan at that ?nancial institution; the nature of any business or entity associated with an account at a ?nancial institution; the source of funds ?owing into an account; or the purpose or nature of any ?nancial transactions involving that ?nancial institution; h. Evidence indicating how and when the Cohen Account and Account was -. and events relating to the crimes under investigation and to the account owner; and i. Evidence indicating the Cohen Account and Account owner?s intent as it' relates to the Subject Offenses under investigation. 33. Based upon the foregoing, I further submit there is probable cause to believe that information stored on Google?s servers associated with the_ Account and - -Account will contain evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of violations of the Subject Offenses, including the following: a. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les necessary to establish the identity of the person(s) who created or used th_kccount and? Account; b. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving a plan or proposal or agreement for Cohen and/or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, tc-and/or entities associated with him; c. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les necessary to establish the identity of any person(s) including records that reveal the whereabouts of the person(s) who 41 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 77 of 105 Communicated with the-Account and ?Account about any matters relating to any plan or proposal or agreementfor Cohen and/or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to- - and/or entities associated with him; d. Communications between the?Account and? Account and others, including employees or representatives of Sterling, Melrose, or other ?nancial rm W, 2- e. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les re?ecting false representations to a ?nancial institution with relation to the intended purpose of an account or loan at that ?nancial institution; the nature of any business or entity associated with an account at a ?nancial institution; the source of funds ?owing into an account; or the purpose or nature of any ?nancial transactions involving that ?nancial institution; f. Evidence indicating how and when the Account and- -Account were accessed or used, to determine the geographic and chronological context of account access, use, and events relating to the crimes under investigation and to the account g. Evidence indicating the-xccount and -_ccount owners? intent as it relates to the Subject Offenses under investigation. owner; 34. Based upon the foregoing, I further submit there is probable cause to believe that information stored on Oath?s servers associated with the .Account will contain evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of violations of the Subject Offenses, including the following: a. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les necessary to establish the identity of the pe1?son(s) who created or used the-Account; 42 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 78 of 105 b. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving a plan or proposal or agreement for Cohen and/or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to i_1nd/or entities associated with him; 0. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les necessary to establish the identity of any person(s) including records that reveal the whereabouts of the person(s) who agreement for Cohen and/ or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, or entities associated with him; d. Communications between the .Account and others, including employees or representatives of Sterling, Melrose, or other ?nancial institution(s), regarding Cohen?s ?nances; and e. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les reflecting false representations to a ?nancial institution with relation to the intended purpose of an account or lo an at that ?nancial institution; the nature of any business or entity associated with an account at a ?nancial institution; the source of ?inds ?owing into an account; or the purpose or nature of any ?nancial transactions involving that ?nancial institution. Review of the Information Obtained Pursuant to the Warrant 35. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703(g), the presence of a law enforcement of?cer is not required for service of a search warrant issued under 2703, or for the collection or production of responsive records. Accordingly, the warrant requested herein will be transmitted to the Providers, which shall be directed to produce a digital copy of any responsive records to law enforcement personnel within 30 days from the date of service. Law enforcement personnel (including, in addition to law enforcement of?cers and agents, and depending on the nature of the ESI and the 4.3 0228,2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 79 of 105 status of the investigation and related proceedings, attorneys for the government, attorney support staff, agency personnel assisting the government in this investigation, and outside technical experts under government control) will retain the records and review them for evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of the Subject Offenses as speci?ed in Section of Attachments A, and to the proposed warrant. 36. In conducting this review, law enforcement personnel may use various methods to I undertaking a cursory inspection of all emails within the Subject Account. This method is analogous to cursorily inspecting all the ?les in a ?le cabinet in an of?ce to determine which paper evidence is subject to seizure. Although law enforcement personnel may use other methods as well, particularly including keyword searches, I know that keyword searches and similar methods are typically inadequate to detect all information subject to seizure. As an initial matter, keyword searches work only for text data, yet many types of ?les commonly associated with emails, including attachments such as scanned documents, pictures, and videos, do not store data as searchable text. Moreover, even as to text data, keyword searches cannot be relied upon to capture all relevant communications in an account, as it is impossible to know in advance all of the unique words or phrases that investigative subjects will use in their communications, and consequently there are often many communications in an account that are relevant to an investigation but that do'not contain any keywords that an agent is likely to search for. 37. Because Cohen and-are attorneys, the review of the content within the Subject Accounts will be conducted pursuant to established screening procedures to ensure that the law enforcement personnel involved in the investigation, including attorneys for the Government, collect evidence in a manner reasonably designed to protect any attorney-client or other applicable 44 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 80 of 105 privilege. When appropriate, the procedures will include use of a designated ??lter team,? separate and apart from the investigative team, in order to review potentially privileged communications and determine which communications to release to the investigation and prosecution team. IV. Request for Non-Disclosure and Sealing Order 38. The existence and scope of this ongoing criminal investigation are not publicly known; As a result, premature public disclosure of this af?davit or the requested warrants could alert otherwise seriously jeopardize the investigation. In particular, based on my experience investigating white collar cases, including cases featuring documents such as agreements, drafts of agreements, notes of conversations, and other documentary evidence, premature disclosure of an investigation may cause the target of the investigation to attempt to destroy or conceal such evidence. In addition, as also set forth above, Cohen uses computers and electronic communications in furtherance of his activity and thus could easily delete, or otherwise conceal such digital evidence from law enforcement were he to learn of the Government?s investigation. See 18 U.S.C. 2705(b)(3). Cohen also appears to have the financial means that would facilitate his flight from prosecution. See 18 U.S.C. 2705(b)(2), (5). 39. Accordingly, there is reason to believe that, were the Providers to notify the subscriber or others of the existence of the warrant, the investigation would be seriously jeopardized. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2705 I therefore respectfully request that the Court direct the Providers not to notify any person of the existence of the warrant for a period of 180 days from issuance, subject to extension upon application to the Court, if necessary. - 40. For similar reasons, I respectfully request that this af?davit and all papers submitted herewith be maintained under seal until the Court orders otherwise, except that the Government be permitted without further order of this Court to provide copies of the warrant and af?davit as 45 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 81 of 105 need be to personnel assisting it in the investigation and prosecution of this matter, and to disclose those materials as necessary to comply with discovery and disclosure obligations in any prosecutions related to this matter. V. Conclusion 41. Based on the foregoing, I respectfully request that the Court issue the warrants sought herein pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. relevant provisions of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41. Special Agent Mason Posilkin United States Attorney?s Of?ce Southern District of New York Sworn to before me this 28th day of February, 2018 HONORABLE GABRIEL W. GORENSTEIN Chief United States Magistrate Judge Southern District of New York 46 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 82 of 105 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In the Matter of a Warrant for All Content and Other Information Associated with the Email Accounts @gmailcom, Maintained at Premises Controlled by Google, Inc., USAO Reference No. 20 1 SROO 127 SEARCH WARRANT AND NON-DISCLOSURE ORDER TO: Google, Inc. (?Provider?) United States Attorney?s Of?ce for the Southern District of New York and the Federal - Bureau of Investigation (collectively, the ?Investigative Agencies?) 1. Warrant. Upon an af?davit of Special Ageni-of the United States Attorney?s Of?ce for the Southern District of New York, and pursuant to the provisions of the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. ?2703(b)(1)(A) and 2703(c)(1)(A), and the relevant provisions of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41, the Court hereby ?nds there is probable cause to believe the email accounts and maintained at premises controlled by Google, Inc., contain evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of crime, all as speci?ed in Attachments A and hereto. Accordingly, the Provider is hereby directed to provide to the Investigative Agencies, within 7 days of the date of service of this'Warrant and Order, the records speci?ed in Section II of Attachments A and hereto, fer subsequent review by law enforcement personnel as authorized in Sections and IV of Attachments A and B. The Government is required to serve a copy of this Warrant and Order on the Provider within 7 days of the date of issuance. The Warrant and Order may be served via Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 83 of 105 electronic transmission or any other means through which the Provider is capable of accepting service. 2. Non?Disclosure Order. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2705 the Court ?nds that there is reason to believe that noti?cation of the existence of this warrant will result in destruction of or tampering with evidence or ?ight from prosecution, or otherwise will seriously jeopardize an ongoing investigation. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that the Provider shall not disclose the 180 days from the date of this Order, subject to extension upon application to the Court if necessary, except that Provider may disclose this Warrant and Order to an attorney for Provider for the purpose of receiving legal advice. 3. Sealing. It is further ordered that this Warrant and Order, and the Af?davit upon which it was issued, be ?led under seal, except that the Government may without further order of this Court serve the Warrant and Order on the Provider; provide copies of the Af?davit or Warrant and Order as need be to personnel assisting the Government in the investigation and prosecution of this matter; and disclose these materials as necessary to comply with discovery and disclosure obligations in any prosecutions related to this matter. Dated: New York, New York Date Issued Time Issued HONORABLE GABRIEL W. GORENSTEIN Chief United States Magistrate Judge Southern District of New York 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 84 of 105 Email Search Attachment A 1. Subject Account and Execution of Warrant This warrant is directed to Google, Inc. (the ?Provider?), headquartered at 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, California 94043, and applies to all content and other information within the Provider?s possession, custody, or control associated with the email account _@gmail.com (the ?Subject Account?) for the time period referenced below. seats? .. appropriate manner to the Provider. The Provider is directed to produce to the law enforcement of?cer an electronic copy of the information speci?ed in Section II below. Upon receipt of the production, law enforcement personnel will review the information for items falling within the categories speci?ed in Section below. II. Information to be Produced by the Provider To the extent within the Provider?s possession, custody, or control, the Provider is directed to produce the following information associated with the Subject Account: 21. Email content. All emails sent to or from, stored in draft form in, or otherwise associated with the Subject Account, including all message content, attachments, and header information (speci?cally including the source and destination addresses associated with each email, the date and time at which each email was sent, and the size and length of each email) limited to items sent, received, or created between November 14, 2017 and the date of this warrant, inclusive. b. Address book information. All address book, contact list, or similar information associated with the Subject Account. 0. Subscriber and payment information. All subscriber and payment information regarding the Subject Account, including but not limited to name, username, address, telephone Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 85 of 105 number, alternate email addresses, registration IP address, account creation date, account status, length of service, types of services utilized, means and source of payment, and payment history. d. Transactional records. All transactional records associated with the Subject Account, including any 1P logs or other records of session times and durations, limited to items sent, received, or created between December 1, 2014 and the date of this warrant, inclusive. e. Customer correspondence. All correspondence with the subscriber or others associated ect?Accountyinel-uding. comp laints; inquiries; and records of actions taken, limited to items sent, received, or created between December 1, 2014 and the date of this warrant, inclusive. f. Search History. All search history and/or web history associated with the Subject Account, limited to items sent, received, or created between December 1, 2014 and the date of this warrant, inclusive. g. Associated content. All Google Docs, files maintained on Google Drive, and instant messages or Gchats associated with the Subject Account, limited to items sent, received, or created between December 1, 2014 and the date of this warrant, inclusive. h. Preserved or backup records. Any preserved or backup copies of any of the foregoing categories of records, whether created in response to a preservation request issued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703(f) or otherwise. Review of Information by the Government Law enforcement personnel (who may include, in addition to law enforcement officers and agents, attorneys for the government, attorney support staff, agency personnel assisting the government in this investigation, and outside technical experts under government control) are authorized to review the records produced by the Provider in order to locate any evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of violations of 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud 2 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 86 of 105 the United States), 1005 (false bank entries); 1014 (false statements to a ?nancial institution), 1343 (wire fraud), and 1344 (bank fraud), including the following: a. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les necessary to establish the identity of the person(s) who created or used the Subject Account; b. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Sterling National Bank, Melrose Credit Union, and/or taxi medallions; - - agreement for Michael D. Cohen and/or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to others, including tt?and/or entities associated with him; d. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Essential Consultants, LLC or Michael D. Cohen Associates, including those which indicate the nature and purpose of payments made to or from Essential Consultants or Michael D. Cohen Associates; e. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les necessary to establish the identity of any person(s) including records that reveal the whereabouts of the person(s) who communicated with the Subject Account about any matters relating to Essential Consultants, LL C, or about any plan or proposal or agreement for Michael D. Cohen and/or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to others, including t<_1nd/ or entities associated with him; f. Communications between the Subject Account and Jeffrey Getzel relating to Michael D. Cohen?s bank accounts, taxes, debts, and/or ?nances; g. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les re?ecting false representations to a ?nancial institution with relation to the intended purpose of an account or loan at that ?nancial 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 87 of 105 institution; the nature of any business or entity associated with an account at a ?nancial institution; the source of funds ?owing into an account; or the purpose or nature of any ?nancial transactions involving that ?nancial institution; h. Evidence indicating how and when the Subject Account was accessed or used, to determine the geographic and chronological context of account access, use, and events relating to the crimes under investigation and to the account owner; and ., i- ectt. i ML. - . Offenses under investigation. IV. Review Protocols Review of the items described in this Attachment shall be conducted pursuant to established procedures designed to collect evidence in a manner reasonably designed to protect any attorney-client or other applicable privilege. When appropriate, the procedures shall include use of a designated ??lter team,? separate and apart from the investigative team, in order to address potential privileges. 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 88 of 105 Email Search Attachment I. Subject Account and Execution of Warrant This warrant is directed to Google, Inc. (the ??Provider?), headquartered at 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, California 94043, and applies to all content and other information within the Provider?s possession, custody, or control associated with the email and ?:the ?Subject Accounts?) for the time A law enforcement of?cer will serve this warrant by transmitting it via email or another appropriate manner to the Provider. The Provider is directed to produce to the law enforcement of?cer an electronic copy of the information speci?ed in Section 11 below. Upon receipt of the production, law enforcement personnel will review the information for items falling within the categories speci?ed in Section below. II. Information to be Produced, by the Provider To the extent within the Provider?s possession, custody, or control, the Provider is directed to produce the following information associated with the Subject Accounts: a. Email content. All emails sent to or from, stored in draft form in, or otherwise associated with the Subject Accounts, including all message content, attachments, and header information (speci?cally including the source and destination addresses associated with each email, the date and time at which each email was sent, and the size and length of each email). b. Address book information. All address book, contact list, or similar information associated with the Subject Accounts. 0. Subscriber and payment information. All subscriber and payment information regarding the Subject Accounts, including but not limited to name, usemame, address, telephone Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 89 of 105 number, alternate email addresses, registration address, account creation date, account status, length of service, types of services utilized, means and source of payment, and payment history. d. Transactional records. All transactional records associated with the Subject Accounts, including any logs or other records of session times and durations. e. Customer correspondence. All correspondence with the subscriber or others associated with the Subject Accounts, including complaints, inquiries, or other contacts with support services W..- .. a W. f. Search History. All search history and/or web history associated with the Subject Accounts. g. Associated content. All Google Docs, ?les maintained on Google Drive, and instant messages or Gchats associated with the Subject Accounts. h. Preserved or backup records. Any preserved or backup copies of any of the foregoing categories of records, whether created in response to a preservation request issued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703(f) or otherwise. Review of Information by the Government Law enforcement personnel (who may include, in addition to law enforcement officers? and agents, attorneys for the government, attorney support staff, agency personnel assisting the government in this investigation, and outside technical experts under government control) are authorized to review the records produced by the Provider in order to locate any evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of violations of 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States), 1005 (false bank entries); 1014 (false statements to a ?nancial institution), 1343 (wire fraud), and 1344 (bank fraud), including the following: a. Communications, records, documents, and other filesinecessary to establish the identity of the person(s) who created or used the Subject Accounts; 2 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 90 of 105 b. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving a plan or proposal or agreement for Michael D. Cohen and/ or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, and/or entities associated with him; c. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les necessary to establish the identity of any person(s) including records that reveal the whereabouts of the person(s) who agreement for Michael D. Cohen and/ or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, tc_and/or entities associated with him; i d. Communications between the Subject Accounts and others, including employees or representatives of Sterling National Bank, Melrose Credit Union, or other ?nancial institution(s), regarding Michael D. Cohen?s ?nances; e. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les re?ecting false representations to a ?nancial institution with relation to the intended purpoSe of an account or loan at that ?nancial institution; the nature of any business or entity associated with an account at a ?nancial institution; the source of funds ?owing into an account; or the purpose or nature of any ?nancial transactions involving that ?nancial institution; f. Evidence indicating how and when the Subject Accounts was accessed or used, to determine the geographic and chronological context of account access, use, and events relating to the crimes under investigation and to the account owner; g. Evidence indicating the Subject Accounts oWners? intent as it relates to the Subject Offenses under investigation. 02.2 8.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 91 of 105 IV. Review Protocols Review of the items described in this Attachment shall be conducted pursuant to established procedures designed to collect evidence in a manner reasonably designed to protect any attorney-client or other applicable privilege. When appropriate, the procedures shall include use of a designated ??lter team,? separate and apart from the investigative team, in order to address potential privileges. 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 92 of 105, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In the Matter of a Warrant for All Content and Other Information Associated with the Email Account @aol.com, Maintained at Premises Controlled by Oath, Inc., USAO Reference No. 2018R00127 SEARCH WARRANT AND ORDER TO: Oath, Inc. (?Provider?) United States Attorney?s Of?ce for the Southern District of New York and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (collectively, the ?Investigative Agencies?) 1. Warrant. Upon an affidavit of Special Agent - of the United States Attorney?s Office for the Southern District of New York, and pursuant to the provisions of the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. and 2703 and the relevant provisions of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41, the Court hereby finds there is probable cause to believe the email maintained at premises controlled by Oath, Inc., contains evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of crime, all as specified in Attachment hereto. Accordingly, the Provider is hereby directed to provide to the Investigative Agencies, within 7 days of the date of service of this Warrant and Order, the records specified in Section II of Attachment hereto, for subsequent review by law enforcement personnel as authorized in Sections and IV of Attachment C. The Government is required to serve a copy of this Warrant and Order on the Provider Within 14 days of the date of issuance. The Warrant and Order may be served via electronic transmission or any other means through which the Provider is capable of accepting service. Case Document 48-4 {Filed 07/18/19 Page 93 of 105 2. Non?Disclosure Order. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2705(b), the Court ?nds that there is reason to believe that noti?cation of the existence of this warrant will result in destruction of or tampering with evidence or ?ight from prosecution, or otherwise will seriously jeopardize an ongoing investigation. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that the Provider shall not disclose the existence of this Warrant and Order to the listed subscriber or to any other person for a period of 180 days from the date of this Order, subject to extension upon application to the Court if for the purpose of receiving legal advice. 3. Sealing. It is further ordered that this Warrant and Order, and the Af?davit upon which it was issued, be ?led under seal, except that the Government may without further order of this Court serve the Warrant and Order on the Provider; provide copies of the Af?davit or Warrant and Order as need be to personnel assisting the Government in the investigation and prosecution of this matter; and disclose these materials as necessary to comply with discovery and disclosure obligations in any prosecutions related to this matter. Dated: New York, New York Date Issued Time Issued HONORABLE GABRIEL W. GORENSTEIN Chief United States Magistrate Judge Southern District of New York 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 94 of 105 Email Search Attachment 1. Subject Account and Execution of Warrant This warrant is directed to Oath, Inc. (the ?Provider?), headquartered at 22000 AOL Way, Dulles, Virginia 20166, and applies to all content and other information within the Provider?s possession, custody, or control associated with the email account -@aol.com (the ?Subject Account?) for the time period between December 1, 2016 and the date of this warrant, inclusive. appropriate manner to the Provider. The Provider is directed to produce to the law enforcement of?cer an electronic copy of the information speci?ed in Section II below. Upon receipt of the production, law enforcement personnel will review the information for items falling within the categories speci?ed in Section below. 11. Information to be Produced by the Provider To the extent within the Provider?s possession, custody, or control, the Provider is directed to produce the following information associated with the Subject Account: a. Email content. All emails sent to or from, stored in draft form in, or otherwise associated with the Subject Account, including all message content, attachments, and header information (speci?cally including the source and destination addresses associated with each email, the date and time at which each email was sent, and the size and length of each email). b. Address book information. All address book, contact list, or similar information associated with the Subject Account. c. Subscriber and payment information. All subscriber and payment information regarding the Subject Account, including but not limited to name, username, address, telephone number, alternate email addresses, registration IP address, account creation date, account status, length of service, types of services utilized, means and source of payment, and payment history. anothermzm Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 95 of 105 d. Transactional records. All transactional records associated with the Subject Account, including any logs or other records of session times and durations. e. Customer correspondence. All correspondence with the subscriber or others associated with the Subject Account, including complaints, inquiries, or other contacts with support services and records of actions taken. f. Search Hismry. All search history and/or web history. categories of records, whether created in response to a preservation request issued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703(f) or otherwise. Review of Information by the Government Law enforcement personnel (who may include, in addition to law enforcement officers and. agents, attorneys for the government, attorney support staff, agency personnel assisting the govemment in this investigation, and outside technical experts under government control) are authorized to review the records produced by the Provider in order to locate any evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of violations of 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States), 1005 (false bank entries); 1014 (false statements to a financial institution), 1343 (wire fraud), and 1344 (bank fraud), including the following: a. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les neceSsary to establish the identity of the person(s) who created or used the Subject Account; b. Communications, records, documents, and other files involving a plan or proposal or agreement for Michael D. Cohen and/ or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to-ind/or entities associated with him; 02.28.2018 Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 96 of 105 c. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les necessary to establish the identity of any person(s) including records that reveal the whereabouts of the person(s) who communicated with the Subject Account about any matters relating to any plan or proposal or agreement for Michael D. Cohen and/or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to - and/or entities associated with him; - an. W- representatives of Sterling National Bank, Melrose Credit Union, or other ?nancial institution(s), regarding Michael D. Cohen?s ?nances; and e. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les re?ecting false representations to a ?nancial institution with relation to the intended purpose of an account or loan at that ?nancial institution; the nature of any business or entity associated with an account at a ?nancial institution; the source of funds ?owing into an account; or the purpose or nature of any ?nancial transactions involving that ?nancial institution. IV. Review Protocols Review of the items described in this Attachment shall be conducted pursuant to established procedures designed to collect evidence in a manner reasonably designed to protect any attorney?client or other applicable privilege. When appropriate, the procedures shall include use of a designated ??lter team,? separate and apart from the investigative team, in order to address potential privileges. 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 97 of 105 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In the Matter of a Warrant for All Content and Other Information Associated with the Email Account :.com, maintained at Premises Controlled by 1 Internet, Inc., USAO Reference No. 201 8R00127 - TO: 1 1 Internet, IHC- (?Provider?) United States Attorney?s Of?ce for the Southern District of New York and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (collectively, the ?Investigative Agencies?) 1. Warrant. Upon an af?davit of Special Agent _of the United States Attorney?s Of?ce for the Southern District of New York, and pursuant to the provisions of the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. 2703(b)(l)(A) and 2703(c)(l)(A), and the relevant provisions of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41, the Court hereby ?nds there is probable cause to believe the email account maintained at premises controlled by 1 Internet, Inc., contains evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of crime, all as speci?ed in Attachment hereto. Accordingly, the Provider is hereby directed to provide to the Investigative Agencies, within 7 days of the date of service of this Warrant and Order, the records speci?ed in Section II of Attachment hereto, for subsequent review by law enforcement personnel as authorized in Sections and IV of Attachment D. The Government is required to serve a copy of this Warrant and Order on the Provider within 14 days of the date of issuance. The Warrant and Order may be served via electronic transmission or any other means through which the Provider is capable of accepting service. Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page?98 of 105 2. Non?Disclosure Order. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2705(b), the Court ?nds that there is reason to believe that noti?cation of the existence of this warrant will result in destruction of or tampering with evidence or ?ight from prosecution, or otherwise will seriously jeopardize an ongoing investigation. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that the Provider shall not disclose the existence of this Warrant and Order to the listed subscriber or to any other person for a period of 180 days from the-date of this Order, subject to extension upon application to the Court if for the purpose of receiving legal advice. 3. Sealing. It is further ordered that this Warrant and Order, and the Af?davit upon which it was issued, be ?led under seal, except that the Government may without further order of this Court serve the Warrant and Order on the Provider; provide copies of the Affidavit or Warrant and Order as need be to personnel assisting the Government in the investigation and prosecution of this matter; and disclose these materials as necessary to comply with discovery and disclosure obligations in any prosecutions related to this matter. Dated: New York, New York Date Issued Time Issued HONORABLE GABRIEL W. GORENSTEIN Chief United States Magistrate Judge Southern District of New York 02.28.2018 7:22:22? :trnecessaryyexc ept:that:P:r meyefereProvgiderre .. Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 99 of 105 Email Search Attachment I. Subject Account and Execution of Warrant This warrant is directed to 1 Internet, Inc. (the ?Provider?), headquartered at 701 Lee Road, Suite 300, Chesterbrook, 19087, and applies to all content and other information within the Provider? possession, custody, or control associated with the email account _(the ?Subject Account?) for the time period between November 14, 2017 A law enforcement of?cer will serve this warrant by transmitting it via email or another appropriate manner to the Provider. The Provider is directed to produce to the law enforcement officer an electronic copy of the information speci?ed in Section II below. Upon receipt of the production, law enforcement personnel will review the information for items falling within the categories specified in Section below. 11. Information to be Produced by the Provider To the extent within the Provider?s possession, custody, or control, the Provider is directed to produce the following information associated with the Subject Account: a. Email content. All emails sent to or from, stored in draft form in, or otherwise associated with the Subject Account, including all message content, attachments, and header information (specifically including the source and destination addresses associated with each email, the date and time at which each email was sent, and the size and length of each email). b. Address book information. All address book, contact list, or similar information associated with the Subject Account. o. Subscriber and payment information. All subscriber and payment information regarding the Subject Account, including but not limited to name, usemame, address, telephone Case Docu?ment 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 100 of 105 number, alternate email addresses, registration IP address, account creation date, account status, length of service, types of services utilized, means and source of payment, and payment history. d. Transactional records. All transactional records associated with the Subject Account, including any IP logs or other records of session times and durations. e. Customer correspondence. All correspondence with the subscriber or others associated with the Subject Account, including complaints, inquiries, or other contacts with support services WV f. Preserved or backup records. Any preserved or backup copies of any of the foregoing categories of records, whether created in response to a preservation request issued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2703(f) or otherwise. Review of Information by the Government Law enforcement personnel (who may include, in addition to law enforcement of?cers and agents, attorneys for the government, attorney support staff, agency personnel assisting the government in this investigation, and outside technical experts under government control) are authorized to review the records produced by the Provider in order to locate any evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of violations of 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States), 1005 (false bank entries); 1014 (false statements to a ?nancial institution), 1343 (wire fraud), and 1344 (bank fraud), including the following: a. Communications, records, documents, and other files necessary to establish the identity of the person(s) who created or used the Subject Account; b. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Sterling National Bank, Melrose Credit Union, and/or taxi medallions; 0. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving a plan, proposal, or agreement for Michael D. Cohen and] or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi 2 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 101 of 105 medallions, and any associated debts ?or liabilities, to others, including to_and/or entities associated With him; d. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Essential Consultants, LLC or Michael D. Cohen Associates, including those which indicate the nature and purpose of payments made to or from Essential Consultants or Michael D. Cohen Associates; e. The identity of any person(s) including records that reveal the whereabouts of the 'personfsi) WW Consultants, LLC, or about any plan or proposal or agreement for Michael D. Cohen and/ or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to others, including t(_and/ or entities associated with him; f. Communications between the Subject Account and Jeffrey Getzel relating to Michael D. Cohen?s bank accounts, taxes, debts, and/or ?nances; g. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les re?ecting false representations to a ?nancial institution with relation to the intended purpose of an account or loan at that ?nancial institution; the nature of any business or entity associated with an account at a ?nancial institution; the source of funds ?owing into an account; or the purpose or nature of any ?nancial transactions involving that ?nancial institution; h. Evidence indicating how and when the Subject Account was accessed or used, to determine the geographic and chronological context of account access, use, and events relating to the crimes under investigation and to the account owner; and i. Evidence indicating the Subject Account owner?s intent as it relates to the Subject Offenses under investigation. 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 102 of 105 IV. Review Protocols Review of the items described in this Attachment shall be conducted pursuant to established procedures designed to collect evidence in a manner reasonably designed to protect any attorney-client or other applicable privilege. When appropriate, the procedures shall include use of a designated ??lter team,? separate and apart from the investigative team, in order to address potential privileges. 02.28.2018 Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 103 of 105 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the Southern District of New York In the Matter of the Search of (Brie?y describe the property to be searched or identi?z the person by name and address) A Device Containing the ResuEts of Three Email Search Warrants, See Attachment A SEARCH AND SEIZURE WARRANT To: Any authorized law enforcement of?cer An application by a federal law enforcement of?cer or an attorney for the government requests the search of the following person or property located 1n the Southern District of New York (identi?z the person or desor the the property to be sear ched and give its location): A Device Containing the Results of Three Email Search Warrants, See Attachment A The person or property to be searched, described above, is believed to conceal (identi?z the person or describe the property to be seized): See Attachment A I ?nd that the or any recorded testimony, establish probable cause to search and seize the person or property. YOU ARE COMMANDED to execute this warrant on or before Mc?? ti? I (not to exceed 14 days) in the daytime 6:any time in the day or night as I ?nd reasonable cause has been established. Unless delayed notice is authorized below, you must give a copy of the warrant and a receipt for the property taken to the person from whom, or from whose premises the property was taken, or leave the copy and receipt at the place where the property was taken. The of?cer executing this warrant or an of?cer present during the execution oF?thc?warran must prepare an inventory as required by law and return this warrant and inventory to the r1: of the Court. Upon its return this warrant and inventory should be ?led under seal by the Clerk of the Court itial?S if I ?nd that immediate noti?cation may have an adverse result listed 1n 18 US 2705 (except fo- delay of trial) and authorize the of?cer executing this warrant to delay notice to the person who or whose pi? opertv ill be searched or selzed (check the appropriate box) Elfor 30 days (not to exceed 30). . Eluntil, the fa ustifying, the later speci date of Date and time issued: 15% [0 ?Luca" Midge Signature City and state: New York. NY Hon. Gabriel w. Gorenstein. us. Magistrate Judge Printed name and title Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 104 of 105 Attachment A I. Device to be Searched The device to be searched (the ?Subject Device?) is described as a black and red USB drive with a white label that says ?Tracking 180208140208?, which contains emails and other content information obtained pursuant to the three search warrants, numbered 17?mj?00503, l7-mj-0085 5 and 17?mj -00854, obtained by the Special Counsel?s Of?ce less the emails that were screened and removed by the privilege team. II. Review of ESI on the Subject Devices Law enforcement personnel (including, in addition to law enforcement of?cers and agents, and depending on the nature of the ESI and the status of the investigation and related proceedings, attorneys for the government, attorney support staff, agency personnel assisting the government in this investigation, interpreters, and outside vendors or technical experts under government control) are authorized to review the ESI contained on the Subject Device for evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of one or more violations of 18 U.S.C. 371 (conSpiracy to defraud the United States), 1005 (false bank entries), 1014 (false statements to a ?nancial institution), 1343 (Wire fraud), and 1344 (bank fraud) (collectively, the ?Subject Offenses?), as listed below: a. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving Sterling National Bank, Melrose Credit Union, and/or taxi medallions; b. Communications, records, documents, and other ?les involving a plan, proposal, or agreement for Michael D. Cohen and] or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to others, including to_and/ or entities associated with him; i c. The identity of any person(s) including records that reveal the whereabouts of the person(s) who communicated with -@gmail.com and/or - (the ?Subject Accounts?) about any plan or proposal or agreement for Michael D. Cohen and/ or entities associated with him to transfer any interest in taxi medallions, and any associated debts or liabilities, to others, including to _and/or entities associated with him; d. Communications between the Subject Accounts and Jeffrey Getzel relating to Michael D. Cohen?s bank accounts, taxes, debts, and/or ?nances; Case Document 48-4 Filed 07/18/19 Page 105 of 105 6. Evidence indicating the owner of the Subject Accounts? intent as it relates to the Subject Offenses under investigation.