{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "14",
    "document_number": "311-1",
    "date": "07/02/21",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": true
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 311-1 Filed 07/02/21 Page 14 of 23\n\nxj3q1gra SEALED\n\nmaterials\" as \"information that is confidential and implicates common law and statutory privacy interests of plaintiff Virginia Roberts.\"\n\nTHE COURT: I have absolutely no idea what that means, and you don't either, and none of us does.\n\nMR. ROSSMILLER: I don't, your Honor, but I think we argued in our submission that it, at least on its face, does not implicate the type of materials that are confidential business materials, trade secrets --\n\nTHE COURT: Ordinarily the subject of --\n\nMR. ROSSMILLER: -- ordinarily the subject of the considerations developed in some of the cases that we cited.\n\nTHE COURT: Okay.\n\nMR. ROSSMILLER: And I should also say that in responding to the subpoena, Boies Schiller has the ability to say that they will not produce certain materials because they are privileged, because they believe that there is some larger overarching confidentiality issue, at which point we would be in a different posture. I am not aware that they have identified any materials as confidential that they would withhold, but I do note that we would not ask for and would not expect to receive privileged materials.\n\nTHE COURT: Okay. Did you provide Judge Sweet with a proposed order?\n\nMR. ROSSMILLER: We did, yes, your Honor.\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 SDNY_GM_00000865 DOJ-OGR-00004907",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 311-1 Filed 07/02/21 Page 14 of 23",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "xj3q1gra SEALED",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "materials\" as \"information that is confidential and implicates common law and statutory privacy interests of plaintiff Virginia Roberts.\"\n\nTHE COURT: I have absolutely no idea what that means, and you don't either, and none of us does.\n\nMR. ROSSMILLER: I don't, your Honor, but I think we argued in our submission that it, at least on its face, does not implicate the type of materials that are confidential business materials, trade secrets --\n\nTHE COURT: Ordinarily the subject of --\n\nMR. ROSSMILLER: -- ordinarily the subject of the considerations developed in some of the cases that we cited.\n\nTHE COURT: Okay.\n\nMR. ROSSMILLER: And I should also say that in responding to the subpoena, Boies Schiller has the ability to say that they will not produce certain materials because they are privileged, because they believe that there is some larger overarching confidentiality issue, at which point we would be in a different posture. I am not aware that they have identified any materials as confidential that they would withhold, but I do note that we would not ask for and would not expect to receive privileged materials.\n\nTHE COURT: Okay. Did you provide Judge Sweet with a proposed order?\n\nMR. ROSSMILLER: We did, yes, your Honor.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 SDNY_GM_00000865 DOJ-OGR-00004907",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Virginia Roberts",
      "MR. ROSSMILLER",
      "Judge Sweet"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Boies Schiller",
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "07/02/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "311-1",
      "SDNY_GM_00000865",
      "DOJ-OGR-00004907"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a 'SEALED' stamp. The conversation is between THE COURT and MR. ROSSMILLER. The document is from the Southern District of New York."
}