Source: https://pl.scribd.com/document/401062069/Concord-Motion-for-Bill-of-Particulars
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 15:38:43+00:00

Document:
Motion To Dismiss Forfeiture Allegation II In the Neighbors case.
pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 7(f).
that Concord engaged in such vague pursuits as “recommend[ing] personnel and over[seeing] . . .
activities,” id. ¶ 11, but provides no details about what Concord actually did and when it did it.
conspirators relating to unidentified social media accounts that it allegedly conspired to fund.
Concord is entitled to this basic information under Rule 7(f).
Concord, and as such none could have bound the corporate entity.
accounts, ¶ 11; (3) caused a person to hold a sign in front of the White House around Mr.
Prigozhin’s alleged birthday, ¶ 12; and (4) met with representatives of IRA, ¶¶ 13(a) and 14.
Concord of any actions specifically taken by its officers or employees.
sought and obtained an extension of time in which to file a motion for a bill of particulars. Dkt.
subject for a bill of particulars.
defense, and perhaps also to be protected against retrial on the same charges.” United States v.
States v. Trie, 21 F. Supp. 2d 7, 21 (D.D.C. 1998); see also United States v. Anderson, 441 F.
evidentiary in nature.” United States v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 37 F. Supp. 398, 402-03 (D.D.C.
pointing to “the voluminous discovery already provided . . . .” Anderson, 441 F. Supp. 2d at 19.
help the defendant prepare for trial. See United States v. Hsia, 24 F. Supp. 2d 14, 31 (D.D.C.
Service) were allegedly impeded and how they were impeded. Id. at 32; see also United States v.
alleged co-conspirators regardless of whether they will be called as trial witnesses); Trie, 21 F.
government to immediately disclose the names of all unindicted co-conspirators); Rogers, 617 F.
defendant can defend itself at trial.” Maury, 695 F.3d at 248 (citing Fed. R. Crim. P.
16(A)(1)(C) Advisory Committee Notes to 1994 Amendments).
conspiracy, it will be impossible for Concord to prepare a defense against these allegations.
adequately respond to the charges.
non-conspirators including the volunteer for the Trump campaign, id. ¶ 54, the “real U.S.
same result is appropriate here.
paragraphs in the above-noted Indictment).
incorporation, (b) the location of incorporation, (c) the name(s) of the incorporators.
4. With respect to ¶ 2, identify by name all alleged conspirators known to the government.
provide regulatory disclosure and/or register as foreign agents.
on behalf of Defendant Concord who allegedly engaged in these alleged activities.
each of the listed entities.
alleged that Defendant Prigozhin engaged in such conduct on behalf of Defendant Concord.
officer, employee or agent thereof, violated the FECA statute or related regulations, and if so, how.
officer, employee or agent thereof, violated the FARA statute or related regulations, and if so, how.
visas, and if so, how.
contemporaneous knowledge of the alleged activity.
30. With respect to ¶ 30d, identify the co-conspirator.
engaged in the alleged activity.
dates and amounts, and identify all persons who engaged in the alleged activity.
37. With respect to ¶ 37, identify all persons who engaged in the alleged activity.
persons who engaged in the alleged activity.
provide all instances of the alleged activity and identify all persons who engaged in the alleged activity.
44. With respect to ¶ 54c, identify the volunteer for the Trump campaign.
knowledge of the alleged activity.
77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85: identify all persons who engaged in the alleged activity.
49. With respect to ¶¶ 53, 65, 72, 73, 74, 77, 80, 81, 82, 84: identify the “real U.S.
51. With respect to ¶ 85, identify the offense that Defendants allegedly conspired to violate.
person. Thank you for your cooperation.
responding to each request set forth in Exhibit A to the Motion.

References: v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.