ORDER

TONY N. LEUNG, Magistrate Judge.

This matter is before the Court, United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung, on the following motions:

A hearing was held on April 17, 2018. (ECF No. 25). Based upon the record, memoranda, oral arguments of counsel, and the agreement of the parties as noted at the hearing and in their respective submissions, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Defendant's Pretrial Motion for Disclosure of Rule 404 Evidence, (ECF No. 14), is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: Defendant requests that the Government "immediately disclose any `bad act' or `similar course of conduct' evidence it intends to offer at trial pursuant to Rule 404 of the Federal Rules of Evidence." The Government has indicated it is aware of its obligations under Rule 404(b) and will comply with said obligations, proposing a two-week deadline for disclosure. (Gov't's Resp., at 1-2, ECF No. 23). At the hearing, Defendant had no objection to the two-week deadline. (Apr. 17, 2018 Motions Hearing Tr. 4:2-14, ECF No. 29).

Rule 404(b) requires the Government to provide reasonable notice before trial when evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act will be used to "prov[e] motive opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident." Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(2). "Rule 404(b) . . . applies to the admission of wrongful-act evidence that is extrinsic to the charged offense; the rule does not prevent admission of other wrongful conduct that is intrinsic to the charged offense." United States v. Ruiz-Chavez, 612 F.3d 983, 988 (8th Cir. 2010) (citations omitted). "Evidence of other wrongful conduct is considered intrinsic when it is offered for the purpose of providing the context in which the charged crime occurred." United States v. Johnson, 463 F.3d 803, 808 (8th Cir. 2006) (citation omitted). Therefore, the Government shall provide notice of all extrinsic evidence that it intends to offer at trial within the purview of Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) no later than two-weeks before trial. If the Government subsequently discovers additional extrinsic evidence, it shall provide reasonable notice of such evidence as soon as practicable after such discovery.

2. Defendant's Pretrial Motion to Compel Attorney for the Government to Disclose Evidence Favorable to the Defendant, (ECF No. 15), is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: Defendant seeks evidence favorable to Defendant pursuant to Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), and their progeny. The Government indicates that it is aware of its obligations under Brady, Giglio, and their progeny and will fully comply with its obligations, but objects to the extent Defendant seeks evidence outside these obligations. (Gov't's Resp., at 2). At the hearing, the Government indicated it has turned over all relevant evidence to date and agreed to provide any evidence subsequently discovered on a rolling basis, but no later than two weeks before trial. (Tr. 4:15-5:9). The Government shall comply fully with its obligations under Brady, Giglio, and their progeny. To the extent Defendant's motion seeks discovery and disclosures outside the Government's obligations under these authorities, it is denied. See United States v. Johnson, 228 F.3d 920, 924 (8th Cir. 2000) ("Criminal defendants do not have a general constitutional right to discovery. In most circumstances, then, a defendant must point to a statute, rule of criminal procedure, or other entitlement to obtain discovery from the government") (citing Weatherford v. Bursey, 429 U.S. 545, 559 (1977)).

3. Defendant's Pretrial Motion for Discovery and Inspection, (ECF No. 16), is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: Defendant seeks discovery materials, including statements, her prior criminal record, items material to the preparation of her defense, and results or reports of physical or mental examinations. The Government indicated that is has already complied with its Rule 16 obligations and is aware of its ongoing duty to disclose. (Gov't's Resp., at 2-3; Tr. 5:10-17). The Government shall fully comply with its obligations under Fed. R. Crim. P. 16. To the extent that Defendant's motion seeks discovery and disclosures outside the Government's obligations under this and related authorities, (see Fed. R. Evid. 702-04, Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(h)), it is denied. See Johnson, 228 F.3d at 924 (citing Weatherford, 429 U.S. at 559).

4. Defendant's Motion for Discovery of Expert Under Rule 16(a)(1)(G), (ECF No. 17), is GRANTED as follows: Defendant seeks disclosure from the Government of a written summary of any expert testimony the Government intends to use at trial. The Government indicated it is aware of its obligations under Rule 16(a)(1)(F)-(G) and will comply. (Gov't's Resp., at 3; Tr. 5:18-6:1). The Government requested that the deadline for such disclosure be set at two weeks prior to trial. (Gov't's Resp., at 3; Tr. 5:18-6:1). Defendant agreed that two weeks was sufficient. (Tr. 5:18-6:1). Therefore, the Government shall disclose a written summary of any expert testimony no later than two weeks prior to trial.

5. Defendant's Motion for Early Disclosure of Jencks Act Material, (ECF No. 18), is DENIED as follows: Defendant requests that the Government disclose all Jencks Act materials at least two weeks prior to trial. The Government objects to a court-ordered disclosure of Jencks Act materials, but indicates it has already voluntarily turned over all Jencks Act materials and will provide any subsequently-discovered materials no later than three days prior to trial. (Gov't's Resp., at 3-4; Tr. 6:2-19). "The Jencks Act requires that the prosecutor disclose any statement of a witness in the possession of the United States which relates to the subject testified to by the witness on direct examination." United States v. Douglas, 964 F.2d 738, 741 (8th Cir. 1992). "Although the United States need not produce Jencks statements prior to a witness' testimony on direct examination, the United States may agree to early discovery of Jencks material." Douglas, 964 F.2d at 741 n. 2. The Government has agreed to early disclosure of Jencks material in this case, indicating it has already provided such materials, and that it does not expect additional materials but will provide any additional materials no later than three days before trial. (Gov't's Resp., at 3-4; Tr. 6:2-19). While the Court appreciates the Government's willingness to turn over Jencks Act materials and expects the Government to provide any subsequently-discovered materials sufficiently in advance so as to prevent delays in trial, the Court will not order their disclosure. Therefore, Defendant's motion is denied. This ruling, however, does not permit the Government to withhold disclosure of materials encompassed by the Jencks Act which need to be disclosed pursuant to other authorities, including Brady, Giglio, and their progeny.

6. Defendant's Pretrial Motion for Government Agents to Retain Rough Notes and Evidence, (ECF No. 19), is GRANTED as follows: Defendant seeks an order directing any law enforcement agent, including any confidential reliable informant, involved in this case to "retain and preserve" all rough notes pertaining to this matter, as well as preserving evidence seized in the course of their investigation. The Government does not object to the motion to the extent it seeks retention and preservation of rough notes and evidence, but objects to any disclosure of rough notes. (Gov't's Resp., at 4). Defendant has not requested disclosure through this motion. Therefore, the Government shall direct its agents involved in this case, including any confidential informants, to retain and preserve any rough notes pertaining to this case and to preserve any evidence seized.

7. All prior consistent orders remain in full force and effect.

8. Failure to comply with any provision of this Order or any other prior consistent order shall subject the non-complying party, non-complying counsel, and/or the party such counsel represents to any and all appropriate remedies, sanctions, and the like.