Subject: RE: Data Transfer Issue Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2021 17:31:35 +0000 We stamped "Confidential" on every page of the particular production uploaded because it is a defined term in our Court-ordered protective order. Per my conversation with IN just now, I will send • a copy of one page of that production (which consisted of 5GB of non-testifying witness 3500) along with our protective order, with the hopes that we can head this off. From: (USANYS) Sent: Thursday, June 3, 2021 12:15 PM To: (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) < :•; (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) Subject: RE: Data Transfer Issue Security people have complained in the past that the rubric "confidential" should be reserved for classified information, but "confidential" is in such common use in litigation and in protective orders that such a limitation on its use never seemed workable. This is a little over the top, but that's what security is these days. From: (USANYS) < > Sent: Thursday, June 3, 202112:06 PM To: (USANYS) ic :); < .. , (USANYS) ; (USANYS) 4 (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) 4 * Subject: Data Transfer Issue I am including everyone in this email because this situation has the potential to spin further out of control. I just received a call from the computer security chief at EOUSA. They have been continuing to look at this situation. They have been reviewing the documents that were sent and have found documents that are stamped, "CONFIDENTIAL". Such a stamping to them indicates the documents might be classified. He also said these documents were not redacted and relate to Epstein. I told him they do relate to Epstein. MI instructed me to have the Criminal Chief or the AUSA contact the FBI to have them look at the documents and determine if they are classified. He wants this done asap so that we can have a call later in the day with him and others, include the General Counsel's Office. He also told me to notify the Contracting Officer on the this contract (she i