Bobbi C. Sternheim
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Client |
102
Very Strong
|
211 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
29
Very Strong
|
34 | |
|
person
CHRISTIAN EVERDELL
|
Business associate |
19
Very Strong
|
19 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Client |
11
Very Strong
|
16 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
70 | |
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
CHRISTIAN EVERDELL
|
Co counsel |
7
|
7 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Laura Menninger
|
Business associate |
6
|
6 | |
|
person
Christian R. Everdell
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
LAW OFFICES OF BOBBI C. STERNHEIM
|
Professional employment |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
ANDREW ROHRBACH
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
John M. Leventhal
|
Professional succession |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Unknown |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Laura Menninger
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MARK S. COHEN
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeff Pagliuca
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
government counsel
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Professional opposing counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Christian R. Everdell
|
Co counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Curcio client
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Counsel of record
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Pagliuca
|
Professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Pretrial conference | A pretrial conference was held where counsel for the government and defendant made their appearan... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Pretrial conference | A final pretrial conference was held to discuss outstanding issues and the plan for jury selection. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Detention | Ms. Maxwell is being held at the MDC under problematic conditions, including over-management and ... | MDC | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | An ongoing legal case involving Ms. Maxwell, where her conditions of confinement are a point of c... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The ongoing criminal case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States Courthouse, 4... | View |
| 2022-08-22 | N/A | Sentencing Hearing in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-07-15 | Legal document service | Bobbi C. Sternheim certified the service of a legal motion with an exhibit to multiple parties in... | N/A | View |
| 2022-07-15 | Legal filing | Bobbi C. Sternheim executed a declaration requesting to be relieved as counsel for Ghislaine Maxw... | N/A | View |
| 2022-07-15 | Legal filing | Attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim filed a Motion Information Statement to be relieved as continued coun... | UNITED STATES COURT OF APPE... | View |
| 2022-07-15 | Legal filing | Attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim filed a declaration in support of a motion to be relieved from repres... | UNITED STATES COURT OF APPE... | View |
| 2022-07-15 | N/A | Court Order issued granting Bobbi C. Sternheim's motion to be relieved as counsel for Ghislaine M... | Thurgood Marshall United St... | View |
| 2022-07-07 | Legal filing | Bobbi C. Sternheim filed a Notice of Appeal for Ghislaine Maxwell. | N/A | View |
| 2022-07-07 | Legal filing payment | Payment of a $505.00 fee for a 'Notice of Appeal/Docketing Fee' for case 20CR330-1 AJN. | U.S. District Court, New Yo... | View |
| 2022-07-07 | Legal filing | Payment of a $505.00 fee for a 'Notice of Appeal/Docketing Fee' in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. | U.S. District Court, New Yo... | View |
| 2022-07-07 | Legal filing | A Notice of Appeal was filed on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-07-07 | N/A | Payment of Notice of Appeal/Docketing Fee | U.S. District Court, Manhattan | View |
| 2022-07-07 | N/A | Notice of Appeal Filed | SDNY | View |
| 2022-06-28 | Sentencing | Sentencing hearing for the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-28 | Legal proceeding | A sentencing proceeding for Ghislaine Maxwell is scheduled for Tuesday, which may need to be post... | United States District Court | View |
| 2022-06-25 | Meeting | Bobbi C. Sternheim met with her client, Ghislaine Maxwell, at the detention facility. | MDC | View |
| 2022-06-24 | N/A | Filing of Document 672 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE | Court Record | View |
| 2022-06-24 | N/A | Filing of Document 672 (Submission Under Seal) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-24 | Legal filing | Document 672 was filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
| 2022-06-21 | N/A | Filing of legal document regarding sentencing procedures. | Court Docket | View |
| 2022-06-15 | Legal filing | Document 662 was filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00009191.jpg
This document is the cover page of a legal filing in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on February 24, 2022, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. It is titled "Ghislaine Maxwell's Reply in Support of Her Motion for a New Trial" and lists her legal counsel from three different law firms. The case number is identified as 1:20-cr-00330-PAE and S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN).
DOJ-OGR-00009099.jpg
This document is the cover page of a court transcript for the 'Voir Dire' (jury selection) proceedings in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, held on November 16, 2021, in the Southern District of New York. It lists Judge Alison J. Nathan as presiding and details the legal teams present for both the prosecution (U.S. Attorney's Office) and the defense (Haddon Morgan and Foreman, plus Sternheim and Stabile).
DOJ-OGR-00009066.jpg
This document is a signature page from a court filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, dated February 24, 2022. It lists the legal counsel for Ghislaine Maxwell, including attorneys from three law firms: HADDON, MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C. in Denver, and COHEN & GRESSER LLP and the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim in New York. The document is electronically signed by attorney Jeffrey S. Pagliuca.
DOJ-OGR-00009002.jpg
This document is the cover page of a legal filing, specifically 'Ghislaine Maxwell's Motion for a New Trial', submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on February 24, 2022. It identifies the case as United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell and lists the defendant's legal counsel from three different law firms. The case number is 1:20-cr-00330-PAE and 20 Cr. 330 (AJN).
DOJ-OGR-00009001.jpg
This document is the signature page (Page 5 of 5) of a legal filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, dated January 13, 2022, and filed on February 24, 2022. It lists the legal counsel representing Ghislaine Maxwell, including Jeffrey S. Pagliuca, Laura A. Menninger, Christian R. Everdell, and Bobbi C. Sternheim, and is addressed to The Honorable Alison J. Nathan. The document also indicates that a copy was sent via email to the counsel of record.
DOJ-OGR-00008975.jpg
This document is a letter dated February 21, 2022, from defense attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Sternheim explains that attached documents concerning a Motion for a New Trial contain proposed redactions to protect the integrity of an inquiry into 'Juror 50's conduct' and to protect the privacy of other jurors involved in the voir dire process.
DOJ-OGR-00008962.jpg
This is a legal letter dated February 16, 2022, from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter accompanies documents filed under seal that contain proposed redactions related to Maxwell's motion for a new trial. The redactions are intended to protect the integrity of a fact-finding inquiry into the conduct of 'Juror 50' during the jury selection process.
DOJ-OGR-00008960.jpg
This document is the signature page (page 36 of 37) of a legal filing from February 11, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The defense team, including attorneys Everdell, Pagliuca, Menninger, and Sternheim, is requesting the court to vacate Maxwell's conviction, dismiss the S2 Indictment, and enter a judgment of acquittal under Rule 29 based on insufficient government proof.
DOJ-OGR-00008925.jpg
This document is the cover page for a legal filing in the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on February 11, 2022, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. It is an omnibus memorandum submitted by Maxwell's legal team in support of her post-trial motions. The document lists the names and contact information for her attorneys from three different law firms.
DOJ-OGR-00019817.jpg
This document is a legal docket summary from the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, chronicling court filings and orders from February 23 to March 18, 2021. The entries detail the procedural battle over Maxwell's third motion for bail and other pretrial motions, including the setting of deadlines, the granting of extensions, and a detailed order from Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the redaction and sealing of sensitive information in court documents. The log illustrates the ongoing legal maneuvering between Maxwell's defense team and the U.S. Government prosecutors.
DOJ-OGR-00019815.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 21-58), covering entries from January 26, 2021, to February 4, 2021. It details procedural battles regarding the redaction of sensitive information in pre-trial motions and disputes over Maxwell's access to a laptop at the MDC Brooklyn detention center. The defense filed multiple significant motions on February 4, 2021, including motions to suppress evidence from a subpoena to a redacted party and motions to dismiss various counts of the superseding indictment based on pre-indictment delay and arguments that alleged misstatements were not perjurious.
DOJ-OGR-00019810.jpg
This document is a page from a court docket sheet in the case of Ghislaine Maxwell, dated March 29, 2021, detailing filings from December 2020. The entries consist of letters and orders between Maxwell's counsel and Judge Alison J. Nathan concerning briefing schedules for a renewed bail motion, requests to seal documents, and ongoing concerns about Maxwell's conditions of confinement at the Metropolitan Detention Center. The court denies a request to summon the prison warden but orders the government to provide regular updates on her confinement conditions.
DOJ-OGR-00019808.jpg
This document is a page from a court docket for the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering entries from November 6, 2020, to December 1, 2020. It lists legal filings including letters, affidavits, mandates, and judge's endorsements regarding discovery deadlines, motion schedules, and conditions of confinement. Judge Alison J. Nathan issues several orders, including extensions for discovery and requirements for parties to confer on detention conditions.
DOJ-OGR-00019793.jpg
This document is a court docket summary from Case 21-58, dated March 24, 2021, detailing legal proceedings involving defendant Ghislaine Maxwell from late February to mid-March 2021. It records the filing of Maxwell's third motion for bail, subsequent responses from the U.S. Government (USA), and various letters and motions from both parties regarding pretrial matters and filing deadlines. The document culminates in a detailed order by Judge Alison J. Nathan on March 18, 2021, which addresses disputes over the redaction and sealing of sensitive information in court filings.
DOJ-OGR-00019792.jpg
This document is a docket sheet from Case 21-58, dated March 24, 2021, listing a series of court filings from February 2021 in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The filings primarily consist of motions from Maxwell's defense team to suppress evidence, dismiss charges, and obtain pretrial disclosures, along with supporting memoranda and affidavits. The log also records letters to Judge Alison J. Nathan from both the prosecution (USA) and the defense concerning Maxwell's conditions of pretrial confinement.
DOJ-OGR-00019791.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from early 2021 (Jan 26 - Feb 4) in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It details various filings including letters regarding redactions and laptop access at the MDC, and significant defense motions to suppress evidence and dismiss multiple counts of the indictment. Judge Alison J. Nathan issued orders regarding redaction timelines and denied a request by the Bureau of Prisons to vacate a previous order.
DOJ-OGR-00019786.jpg
This document is a log of court entries from December 2020 related to the case of Ghislaine Maxwell, detailing various letters and orders. Key events include communications regarding briefing schedules, requests for sealing documents, a renewed motion for release on bail, and concerns about Maxwell's confinement conditions at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York. The Court issued orders setting submission deadlines, addressing sealing requests, and requiring the Government to provide regular updates on Maxwell's conditions, while denying a request to summon the Warden.
DOJ-OGR-00019784.jpg
This document is a page from a court docket sheet (Case 21-58) covering entries from November 6, 2020, to December 1, 2020, related to the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell. Key events include the dismissal of an appeal by the Second Circuit, extensions granted for discovery deadlines, and disputes regarding the timing of evidence disclosure. Significant attention is paid to Maxwell's conditions of confinement at the MDC, with Judge Nathan ordering the parties to confer with Warden Heriberto Tellez regarding the defendant's concerns.
DOJ-OGR-00019767.jpg
This document is a court docket summary from Case 21-58, dated March 24, 2021, detailing legal proceedings involving Ghislaine Maxwell. It chronicles filings from late February to mid-March 2021, including Maxwell's third motion for bond, the government's opposition, and various procedural motions and letters. A key event is a March 18, 2021 order by Judge Alison J. Nathan ruling on disputes over the redaction and sealing of sensitive documents, denying the government's request to fully seal an exhibit and ordering the parties to confer on redactions.
DOJ-OGR-00019766.jpg
This document is a docket sheet from a legal case, detailing a series of court filings in February 2021 related to Ghislaine Maxwell. On February 4, 2021, Maxwell's defense team filed numerous motions to suppress evidence and dismiss various charges from the superseding indictment. The log also records subsequent sealed filings and letters to Judge Alison J. Nathan from both the prosecution (USA) and the defense concerning Maxwell's pretrial confinement conditions.
DOJ-OGR-00019760.jpg
This document contains a court docket log from December 4-8, 2020, regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The entries detail procedural disputes over sealing documents, a schedule for a renewed bail motion, and significant back-and-forth regarding Maxwell's conditions of confinement at the MDC Brooklyn. Judge Nathan denied a request to summon Warden Heriberto Tellez personally but ordered the government to provide written updates every 60 days concerning Maxwell's access to legal materials and the frequency of searches conducted on her.
DOJ-OGR-00019758.jpg
This document is a page from the court docket for United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering entries from November 6, 2020, to December 1, 2020. It details various procedural filings, including discovery deadline extensions, an affidavit from AUSA Maurene Comey, and the dismissal of an appeal by the Second Circuit. Notably, it includes orders regarding Maxwell's conditions of confinement at the MDC, specifically ordering parties to confer regarding Warden Heriberto Tellez addressing her concerns.
DOJ-OGR-00019757.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet for Case 21-58 (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell) covering proceedings from September 8, 2020, to November 5, 2020. It logs the transmission of appeal records to the USCA, the placement of several sealed documents in a vault, and the appearance of attorney Bobbi Sternheim for the defense. The docket details a series of legal correspondence between the prosecution (AUSAs Comey, Moe, Pomerantz) and the defense (Everdell, Pagliuca) regarding requests to delay disclosure and investigative files, culminating in a judge's order regarding Brady disclosure obligations.
DOJ-OGR-00019738.jpg
This document is a 'Notice of Appearance' filed on January 25, 2021, in the case USA v. Maxwell (Docket 21-58). Attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim formally enters the case as additional counsel for the appellant, Ghislaine Maxwell, noting that she is serving as co-counsel alongside Christian R. Everdell of Cohen & Gresser, LLP.
DOJ-OGR-00019731.jpg
This document is a court docket summary from January 2021, detailing a series of legal filings in Ghislaine Maxwell's case from early December 2020. The entries include letters from Maxwell's legal team to Judge Alison J. Nathan concerning briefing schedules, sealing requests, a renewed motion for bail, and her conditions of confinement at the Metropolitan Detention Center. The document also includes court orders setting deadlines for legal briefs and denying Maxwell's request to summon the prison warden, instead ordering the government to provide regular written updates on her status.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-07-07 | Paid | Bobbi C. Sternheim | U.S. District Cou... | $505.00 | Notice of Appeal/Docketing Fee for Case 20CR330... | View |
Unknown
Standard legal disclaimer and Covid-19 office closure notice found in an email signature/footer.
Foregoing motion with exhibit
Bobbi C. Sternheim served a legal motion via email to Maurene Comey (maurene.comey@usdoj.gov) and Andrew Rohrbach (andrew.rohrbach@usdoj.gov).
Foregoing motion with exhibit
Bobbi C. Sternheim served a legal motion via U.S. mail (postage prepaid) to Ghislaine Maxwell at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn.
Foregoing motion with exhibit
Bobbi C. Sternheim served a legal motion via email to Hon. John M. Leventhal (judgeleventhal@aidalalaw.com).
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter opposing the motion filed by counsel for Sarah Ransome and Elizabeth Stein to give oral victim impact statements at Ghislaine Maxwell's sentencing hearing. The letter argues that neither individual qualifies as a statutory crime victim under the CVRA.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim informs Judge Nathan that her client, Ghislaine Maxwell, has been unjustifiably placed on suicide watch by the MDC, preventing her from preparing for her sentencing. Sternheim states Maxwell is not suicidal and warns that she will move for an adjournment if the situation persists.
No Subject
This is the signature page of a letter or legal filing from Bobbi C. Sternheim, indicating that attachments are included and that Counsel of Record have been copied.
Challenge to standing under CVRA
No preview available
Sentencing Procedures / Victim Statements
Request regarding the manner of sentencing and opposition to impact statements from individuals not identified as victims in the charged offenses.
Defense counsel letter regarding sealing of certain docum...
No preview available
Defense counsel writes regarding sealing of certain docum...
Letter dated 6/17/2022 entered on 6/21/2022.
2-day extension to file sentencing submission
Request for extension (Denied by court on 05/11/2022).
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Request for a two-day extension to file sentencing submission due to attorney travel.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Requesting a stay of ruling pending review of a new interview given by Juror 50 to Paramount Plus.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter arguing for a new trial for Ghislaine Maxwell based on the assertion that Juror 50 gave false answers on a juror questionnaire regarding his own past sexual abuse, which should have disqualified him from the jury.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter from Ghislaine Maxwell's counsel requesting a proffer from Juror 50's counsel to explain the basis for the juror's assertion of the Fifth Amendment, in light of the juror's public statements and the government's consideration of immunity.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Request regarding Juror 50's assertion of Fifth Amendment privilege and government immunity.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter from the defense proposing limited redactions to an attached Opinion and Order, in response to a Court Order (Dkt. 610) from the same day.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter from the defense proposing limited redactions to an attached Opinion and Order in response to a Court Order (Dkt. 610).
Response to Dkt. 605
Letter in response to Order 605.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Discussion regarding proposed redactions to documents related to Juror 50's conduct and motion for a new trial.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter submitting documents under seal with proposed redactions concerning Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for a new trial. The redactions are intended to protect the integrity of an inquiry into the conduct of Juror 50 during the voir dire process.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter submitting documents under seal with proposed redactions concerning Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for a new trial. The redactions are intended to protect the integrity of an inquiry into the conduct of Juror 50 during the voir dire process.
Letter in Response to Dkt. 596
Letter in Response to Dkt. 596
Response to Dkt. 596
Letter in response to a previous docket entry.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity