{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "13",
    "document_number": "311-1",
    "date": "07/02/21",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 311-1 Filed 07/02/21 Page 13 of 23\n12\nxj3q1gra\nSEALED\nposition to be able to describe the investigation in the way that we have in our submission.\nTHE COURT: Well, that's clear. That's clear. I mean, were I Boies Schiller, I would have -- never mind. We won't say what I would have done.\nSo I'm looking at the protective order itself, and of course not having been privy to any of the materials in the case -- and they're all under seal, so, I mean, I can dissolve the seal and get them, but there are 150 documents there that are under seal for filings, there are multiple documents that are under seal.\nMR. ROSSMILLER: Not to mention all the underlying materials, of course.\nTHE COURT: Not to mention all the underlying materials.\nSo you argue there isn't any truly confidential material in this, this isn't a trade secrets case, and obviously it's not a trade secrets case. It's a libel case. It would seem that the most scurrilous of accusations would have already floated across the face of the complaint. But since Maxwell can't object, how can I know that all this is about is information that would be, you know, embarrassing?\nMR. ROSSMILLER: I would point the Court in the first instance to the definition of \"confidential materials\" in the protective order itself, which describes \"confidential\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300 SDNY_GM_00000864\nDOJ-OGR-00004906",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 311-1 Filed 07/02/21 Page 13 of 23",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "12\nxj3q1gra\nSEALED",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "position to be able to describe the investigation in the way that we have in our submission.\nTHE COURT: Well, that's clear. That's clear. I mean, were I Boies Schiller, I would have -- never mind. We won't say what I would have done.\nSo I'm looking at the protective order itself, and of course not having been privy to any of the materials in the case -- and they're all under seal, so, I mean, I can dissolve the seal and get them, but there are 150 documents there that are under seal for filings, there are multiple documents that are under seal.\nMR. ROSSMILLER: Not to mention all the underlying materials, of course.\nTHE COURT: Not to mention all the underlying materials.\nSo you argue there isn't any truly confidential material in this, this isn't a trade secrets case, and obviously it's not a trade secrets case. It's a libel case. It would seem that the most scurrilous of accusations would have already floated across the face of the complaint. But since Maxwell can't object, how can I know that all this is about is information that would be, you know, embarrassing?\nMR. ROSSMILLER: I would point the Court in the first instance to the definition of \"confidential materials\" in the protective order itself, which describes \"confidential",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300 SDNY_GM_00000864\nDOJ-OGR-00004906",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Boies Schiller",
      "Maxwell",
      "MR. ROSSMILLER"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Boies Schiller",
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "07/02/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "311-1",
      "SDNY_GM_00000864",
      "DOJ-OGR-00004906"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a header and footer. The content is a discussion between the court and MR. ROSSMILLER about a case involving Maxwell. The document is marked as 'SEALED'."
}