Richard Cleary

Richard Cleary represented Elizabeth Holmes in evidentiary arguments and the final jury-instruction conference. His recorded participation focused on customer survey and feedback reports, evidentiary foundation, and instructions concerning uncharged conduct, multiple conspiracies, and witness totals.

In seeking admission of customer feedback reports, Cleary connected the documents to Holmes's testimony that she received customer feedback by email and to the government's cross-examination concerning the Walgreens partnership. The court said the cited testimony did not establish whether Holmes had reviewed the particular documents and questioned the defense's constitutional theory.

During the charge conference, Cleary framed the multiple-conspiracies request around evidence concerning entities outside the charged conspiracies. He also argued that jurors should not infer guilt or innocence from the government's larger number of witnesses, and the court agreed to give that instruction.