I find that the declarations fail to articulate a factual dispute that would merit an evidentiary hearing given the absence of personal knowledge in both declarations. Dr. Ghannam's and Dr. Porterfield's declarations are functionally the same as an attorney affidavit purporting to create a factual dispute even though the attorney has no personal knowledge of the underlying facts. Courts in this Circuit have uniformly rejected such attorney affidavits based on the absence of the attorney's personal knowledge, see, e.g. , United States v. Perryman , 12 Cr. 0213, 2013 WL 4039374, at *6 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 7, 2013) ; United States v. Mason , 06 Cr. 80, 2007 WL 541653, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 16, 2007), and here, that same absence of personal knowledge dooms the instant psychology declarations. Accord United States v. Wilson , 493 F.Supp.2d 364, 381 (E.D.N.Y. 2006) (rejecting the affidavit of an investigator, "who was not present at the scene of the arrest," because he had "no personal knowledge of the circumstances of the arrest" on a motion to suppress).

"[A]liases and nicknames should not be stricken from an Indictment when evidence regarding those aliases or nicknames will be presented to the jury at trial." United States v. Elson, 968 F. Supp. 900, 909 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) (citing United States v. Ianniello, 621 F.Supp. 1455, 1479 (S.D.N.Y.1985)); see also United States v. Mason, 2007 WL 541653, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 16, 2007) ("Accordingly, aliases may be included in an indictment where evidence of those aliases will be presented to the jury at trial."). Here, the Government represents that it will call multiple witnesses who will testify that they knew Defendant Burke as one of the aliases listed in the Indictment and the case caption.

Count 63 does not otherwise describe the weapon or weapons that any particular defendant is alleged to have possessed; or the time and location of such possession. This issue was addressed in United States v. Mason, 2007 WL 541653 (S.D.N.Y. 2007): In addition, [defendant] requests similar information for Count Two, including the specific dates, times, and locations where he possessed a firearm, how it was in furtherance of drug trafficking, and whether his possession was constructive or actual. ... The purpose of a bill of particulars is to provide sufficient information about an offense to permit the defendant to prepare for trial, to avoid unfair surprise, and to preclude a second prosecution for the same offense. ... However, "a bill of particulars is not a general tool of discovery, nor is it a device to give the defense a road map to the government's case."