With that in mind, the Court first turns to the claim that the warrants were over broad.
The Fourth Amendment prohibits the "general, exploratory rummaging [of] a person's belongings" by requiring "a 'particular description' of the things to be seized". U.S. v. Maxwell, 287 U.S. App. D.C. 234, 920 F.2d 1028, 1031 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (quoting Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 91 S. Ct. 2022, 2039, 29 L. Ed. 2d 564 (1971)). In this case the Court has examined the detailed affidavit submitted in support of the application for the warrants. It contains an itemized list of the items subject to seizure, which is attached to the affidavit as Schedule A. The list is broken down into seven categories of documents, and is sufficiently detailed and tailored to allow only the seizure of items related to the alleged criminal acts of the defendants. It is not an overly inclusive list and is not "blatantly open-ended" U.S. v. Nicely, 287 U.S. App. D.C. 322, 922 F.2d 850, 859 (D.C. Cir. 1991). Therefore, the Court finds that the warrants were not overly broad.
The Defendants have also asserted that the warrants were not supported by probable cause. They state that there is no allegation of a specific crime having been committed on the premises sought to be searched and that the information detailed in the affidavit was stale and therefore cannot support a finding of probable cause.
On the issue of the connection between the criminal activity and the premises to be searched, there is no requirement that the premises to be searched be the scene of actual criminal activity. "A magistrate need only conclude that it would be reasonable to seek the evidence in the place indicated in the affidavit." United States v. Ocampo, 937 F.2d 485, 490 (9th Cir. 1991) quoting, United States v. Fannin, 817 F.2d 1379, 1382 (9th Cir. 1987). In making that determination, the magistrate is free to rely on the conclusions of experienced police officers regarding where evidence is likely to be found. Id. As this Circuit stated in adopting this approach:
"Observations of illegal activity outside of the home can provide probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant for a suspects house, even in the absence of an allegation that any illegal activity occurred in the home itself." U.S. v. Thomas, 300 U.S. App. D.C. 380, 989 F.2d 1252, 1254 (D.C. Cir. 1993).