Via CM/ECF September 19, 2022

Raymond J. Dearie

Special Master

United States District Court

Southern District of Florida

701 Clematis Street

West Palm Beach, FL 33401

RE: Trump v. United States, No. 22-81294 (S.D. Fla.)

Dear Judge Dearie:

On September 16, 2022, Your Honor invited the parties to the above-captioned 

litigation to provide a docketed letter with suggestions regarding the agenda for tomorrow’s 

hearing before Your Honor. ECF 94. This afternoon, Your Honor provided the parties with 

a Draft Case Management Plan (the “Draft Plan”). By way of responding to the invitation 

for agenda topics and as an initial request for consideration of modifying the Draft Plan, 

the Plaintiff states as follows:

The District Court’s order indicates a presumptive end-date of November 30, 2022. 

The proposed calendar, circulated today to the parties only, compresses the entirety of the 

inspection and labeling process to be completed by October 7, 2022. We respectfully 

suggest that all of the deadlines can be extended to allow for a more realistic and complete 

assessment of the areas of disagreement. Along those lines, and to assure this Court that 

the parties are operating with appropriate urgency, we would suggest a status conference 

in roughly two weeks to gauge how long the inspection process and rolling categorizations 

are taking and to take a fact-based measure of the likely duration of these events.

In the meantime, we provide below an informal “grid” of party obligations under 

Judge Cannon’s order and possible deadlines to be discussed tomorrow or soon after:

Responsibility Deadline

Government to provide copies of filter team documents 

considered possibly privileged (Exh. A) 

Complete

Government to provide copies of all other documents 

except those marked classified (largest cache)

TBD

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 97 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 1 of 4
2

Responsibility Deadline

Government to make available documents marked 

“classified” and attached papers (prioritized in Order)

TBD (next week?)

Plaintiff to create privilege log (with basis) for Exh. A 

documents 

TBD (two weeks?)

Plaintiff to categorize (four categories) remaining 

seized documents (largest cache) 

Mid-October

Special Master to provide logs to DOJ to identify 

disputed areas

Special Master to make report and recommendations on 

areas of disagreement 

Late October

Special Master to establish deadline for Plaintiff filings 

under Rule 41(g) or related to Rule 41(g)

Early November

Special Master deadlines for reply and responses to any 

pleadings 

Mid-November

Hearing on any Rule 41 or related filings Late November

 

Finally, although we recognize the time for full objections on the Draft Plan is not 

today, we are concerned that it contemplates resolving issues that were not raised by Judge 

Cannon in her order, her order denying the stay, or oral argument. Specifically, Judge 

Cannon was aware of the likelihood of eventual Rule 41(g) litigation and established a 

process by which the Special Master would evaluate any such claims before reporting and 

recommending to the Court. While the Plaintiff is, of course, willing to brief anything 

ordered by the Court under the auspices of the Special Master, we are concerned that the 

Draft Plan directs the Plaintiff to address whether Rule 41(g) litigation should be litigated 

under Case No. 9:22-MJ-08332-BER. The Plaintiff respectfully sees no indication the 

District Court planned to carve out related litigation for a merits determination by the 

issuing magistrate for the warrant in question. Most importantly, none of the District 

Court’s Orders have ever indicated that this was even a consideration.

Similarly, the Draft Plan requires that the Plaintiff disclose specific information 

regarding declassification to the Court and to the Government. We respectfully submit that 

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 97 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 2 of 4
3

the time and place for affidavits or declarations would be in connection with a Rule 41 

motion that specifically alleges declassification as a component of its argument for return 

of property. Otherwise, the Special Master process will have forced the Plaintiff to fully 

and specifically disclose a defense to the merits of any subsequent indictment without such 

a requirement being evident in the District Court’s order.

In short, the Plaintiff has every interest in expeditiously moving forward on the 

document review, characterizations, and any ensuing litigation. With the Government’s 

help, in terms of access to the materials and clearance for Plaintiff’s attorneys, we believe 

the parties can meet the expected deadline of November 30. While we have concerns about 

the inclusion of two aspects within the Draft Plan (timing of any declassification 

disclosures and briefing regarding reversion to the issuing magistrate), we are otherwise in 

general agreement with Your Honor’s proposed sequencing but suggest addressing the 

potential deadlines at tomorrow’s status conference.

Thank you for the opportunity to present some of these issues by way of assisting 

with tomorrow’s agenda.

Sincerely,

James M. Trusty

Ifrah Law PLLC

1717 Pennsylvania Ave. NW

Suite 650

Washington, D.C. 20006

Telephone: (202) 524-4176

Email: jtrusty@ifrahlaw.com

Christopher M. Kise

Chris Kise & Associates, P.A.

201 East Park Avenue, 5th Floor

Tallahassee, FL 32301

Telephone: (850) 270-0566

Email: chris@ckise.net

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 97 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 3 of 4
4

Lindsey Halligan

Florida Bar No. 109481 

511 SE 5th Avenue

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301

Email: lindseyhalligan0@gmail.com

M. Evan Corcoran 

SILVERMAN|THOMPSON|

SLUTKIN|WHITE, LLC

400 East Pratt Street – Suite 900 

Baltimore, MD 21202 

Telephone: (410) 385-2225 

Email: ecorcoran@silvermanthompson.com 

Counsel for Plaintiff Donald J. Trump

CC: Juan Antonio Gonzalez, Jr., juan.antonio.gonzalez@usdoj.gov

Anthony W. Lacosta, anthony.lacosta@usdoj.gov

Julie A. Edelstein, julie.edelstein@usdoj.gov

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 97 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 4 of 4