An application for a gag order against grand jury witnesses was insufficient. \u201cThe application as currently submitted fails to establish sufficient grounds for a non-disclosure order. First, a particularized showing of need has not been made and, instead, the application rests on boilerplate assertions that could be made with respect to essentially any grand jury proceeding. See App. at 2 (stating that there is \u2018reason to believe\u2019 disclosure may hinder the criminal investigation and prosecution, without any particularized discussion). Second, the Government seeks an order lasting \u2018until further order of the Court or until twelve months from the date of the order, whichever occurs first,\u2019 id. at 1, without any showing that such an extensive period is appropriate based on the facts of this case.\u201d In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12396 (D. Nev. Jan. 26, 2018);* In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12394 (D. Nev. Jan. 26, 2018);* In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12766 (D. Nev. Jan. 26, 2018);* In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12774 (D. Nev. Jan. 26, 2018).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
An application for a gag order against grand jury witnesses was insufficient. \u201cThe application as currently submitted fails to establish sufficient grounds for a non-disclosure order. First, a particularized showing of need has not been made and, instead, the application … Continue reading