at 884 (“[T]he defendant’s right to challenge the evidence introduced against him is quite limited. He can offer evidence that explains the requesting country’s proof, but he cannot submit evidence that contradicts it.”). Costa Rica has submitted credible evidence, in the form of statements from Umana and the fifth floor receptionist, that Nolan returned to the Intercontinental around 10:00 a.m. on March 6, 2005. Cos-ta Rica’s submission also includes several witnesses statements and emails that suggest Brenes, rather than Nolan, removed the documents from Cohen’s room. Nevertheless, we will credit Costa Rica’s evidence and assume that Nolan returned to the hotel and removed documents from Cohen’s room. See In re Sainez, 2008 WL 366135 at *18, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9573 at *55-56 (<HOLDING>). However, this fact still does not show that
holding that the dismissal of an indictment did not negate the presumption of probable cause holding that a probable cause determination is appropriate for summary judgment where there are no genuine issues of material fact and no credibility issues holding that a suspects ability to proffer an innocent explanation for the facts does not negate probable cause holding the fact that officers belief proved to be mistaken does not negate a finding of probable cause holding that inconsistencies that are not sufficient to negate the showing of probable cause raise issues which are appropriate for determination at full trial in the requesting country