{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "2",
    "document_number": "70",
    "date": "08/05/25",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 70 Filed 08/05/25 Page 2 of 4\nHon. Richard M. Berman, U.S.D.J.\nHon. Paul A. Engelmayer, U.S.D.J.\nAugust 4, 2025\nPage 2 of 4\n5. Analyzing how the Nolle Prosequi ([Epstein] ECF No. 52) filed in this case impacts proposed disclosure, with legal authorities.\n(Epstein Dkt. 67). In the Maxwell case, the Court directed the Government to provide additional information by August 4, 2025, in particular, a letter:\n1. Stating whether the Government moves to unseal the grand jury exhibits as well as the transcripts, or just the transcripts.\n2. Identifying with specificity the grand jury exhibits, as redacted for public release, that are not already part of the public record. In making this assessment, the Government should take into account whether the unredacted portions of these exhibits were received in evidence during trial in this case, otherwise disclosed on the docket of this case, or disclosed in the course of civil litigation, see, e.g., Giuffre v. Maxwell, 15 Civ. 7433 (LAP).\n3. Identifying with specificity the information testified to in the grand jury transcripts, as redacted for proposed release, that is not already part of the public record, taking into account the sources above.\n(Maxwell Dkt. 797).\nBecause the Court's Orders, and the information sought, are consistent in several respects, the Government respectfully submits this consolidated letter response.\nFirst, at this time, the Government has moved only to unseal the grand jury transcripts in these cases. Of course, the grand jury exhibits are not the only exhibits in these cases; a large number of exhibits were admitted at the Maxwell trial, which trial exhibits are—subject to judicially approved redactions and/or sealing—presumptively public documents. See, e.g., United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1049 (2d Cir. 1995) (“the public has an especially strong right of access to evidence introduced in trials” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)); United States v. Akhvan, 532 F. Supp. 3d 181, 186 (S.D.N.Y. 2021) (“trial exhibits are judicial documents to which an ‘especially strong’ common law presumption of access applies” (quoting Amodeo, 71 F.3d at 1049)). The Government previously made those trial exhibits—subject to any judicially approved redactions and/or sealing—available to the public through a website during the Maxwell trial.\nThe Government respectfully requests leave of the Court to advise the Court by August 8, 2025, of its position with respect to unsealing of the grand jury exhibits. Such timing will permit the Government to consider (with respect to its underlying position as well as with respect to any",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 70 Filed 08/05/25 Page 2 of 4",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Hon. Richard M. Berman, U.S.D.J.\nHon. Paul A. Engelmayer, U.S.D.J.\nAugust 4, 2025\nPage 2 of 4",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "5. Analyzing how the Nolle Prosequi ([Epstein] ECF No. 52) filed in this case impacts proposed disclosure, with legal authorities.\n(Epstein Dkt. 67). In the Maxwell case, the Court directed the Government to provide additional information by August 4, 2025, in particular, a letter:\n1. Stating whether the Government moves to unseal the grand jury exhibits as well as the transcripts, or just the transcripts.\n2. Identifying with specificity the grand jury exhibits, as redacted for public release, that are not already part of the public record. In making this assessment, the Government should take into account whether the unredacted portions of these exhibits were received in evidence during trial in this case, otherwise disclosed on the docket of this case, or disclosed in the course of civil litigation, see, e.g., Giuffre v. Maxwell, 15 Civ. 7433 (LAP).\n3. Identifying with specificity the information testified to in the grand jury transcripts, as redacted for proposed release, that is not already part of the public record, taking into account the sources above.\n(Maxwell Dkt. 797).\nBecause the Court's Orders, and the information sought, are consistent in several respects, the Government respectfully submits this consolidated letter response.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "First, at this time, the Government has moved only to unseal the grand jury transcripts in these cases. Of course, the grand jury exhibits are not the only exhibits in these cases; a large number of exhibits were admitted at the Maxwell trial, which trial exhibits are—subject to judicially approved redactions and/or sealing—presumptively public documents. See, e.g., United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1049 (2d Cir. 1995) (“the public has an especially strong right of access to evidence introduced in trials” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)); United States v. Akhvan, 532 F. Supp. 3d 181, 186 (S.D.N.Y. 2021) (“trial exhibits are judicial documents to which an ‘especially strong’ common law presumption of access applies” (quoting Amodeo, 71 F.3d at 1049)). The Government previously made those trial exhibits—subject to any judicially approved redactions and/or sealing—available to the public through a website during the Maxwell trial.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Government respectfully requests leave of the Court to advise the Court by August 8, 2025, of its position with respect to unsealing of the grand jury exhibits. Such timing will permit the Government to consider (with respect to its underlying position as well as with respect to any",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00000762",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Richard M. Berman",
      "Paul A. Engelmayer"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "U.S.D.J.",
      "Government"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "S.D.N.Y."
    ],
    "dates": [
      "August 4, 2025",
      "August 8, 2025",
      "08/05/25"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:19-cr-00490-RMB",
      "Document 70",
      "ECF No. 52",
      "Epstein Dkt. 67",
      "Maxwell Dkt. 797",
      "15 Civ. 7433 (LAP)",
      "71 F.3d 1044",
      "532 F. Supp. 3d 181",
      "DOJ-OGR-00000762"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. It is a formal legal document with proper formatting and citations. There are no visible redactions or damage to the document."
}