{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "20 of 43",
    "document_number": "459",
    "date": "11/15/21",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 459 Filed 11/15/21 Page 20 of 43\nLalWmaxC\nquestions about which courtroom we will ultimately be using.\nBut I think that getting to the issue of sealing is more important.\nTHE COURT: OK. And I think I can answer the other logistic questions, probably.\nAll right. As I've noted, the defense, without objection from the government, requests that the parties' joint proposed questionnaire and voir dire be sealed.\nI guess my first question, just for clarification, Ms. Sternheim, is whether that request extends to the Court's draft or what will ultimately be the final blank questionnaire and anticipated voir dire.\nMS. STERNHEIM: Judge, the answer is yes, and if you'd like me to give my reasons, I'm glad to.\nTHE COURT: Yes. First I wanted to know whether you've consented to that, and I'll hear you. I assume whatever the reasons are it would apply to all. But I do want to hear, and I need to hear very specifically, are you seeking particular redactions, or what is the concern? And to the extent you have any authorities for the proposition that you seal proposed documents like this and the Court's draft in anticipation, I would certainly take that. But it's my understanding, and research indicates, that they are typically docketed. I've certainly always docketed them in the many cases I've tried. But let me hear specifically what the issue\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00006992",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 459 Filed 11/15/21 Page 20 of 43",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LalWmaxC\nquestions about which courtroom we will ultimately be using.\nBut I think that getting to the issue of sealing is more important.\nTHE COURT: OK. And I think I can answer the other logistic questions, probably.\nAll right. As I've noted, the defense, without objection from the government, requests that the parties' joint proposed questionnaire and voir dire be sealed.\nI guess my first question, just for clarification, Ms. Sternheim, is whether that request extends to the Court's draft or what will ultimately be the final blank questionnaire and anticipated voir dire.\nMS. STERNHEIM: Judge, the answer is yes, and if you'd like me to give my reasons, I'm glad to.\nTHE COURT: Yes. First I wanted to know whether you've consented to that, and I'll hear you. I assume whatever the reasons are it would apply to all. But I do want to hear, and I need to hear very specifically, are you seeking particular redactions, or what is the concern? And to the extent you have any authorities for the proposition that you seal proposed documents like this and the Court's draft in anticipation, I would certainly take that. But it's my understanding, and research indicates, that they are typically docketed. I've certainly always docketed them in the many cases I've tried. But let me hear specifically what the issue",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00006992",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Sternheim"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "11/15/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "459",
      "DOJ-OGR-00006992"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and readable format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}