{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "249",
    "document_number": "759",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 759 Filed 08/10/22 Page 249 of 267 2277 LCAVMAX8\nyou're in a position at this point to make those disclosures as if it is that person, so I did expect a full disclosure.\nWhat is the defense's anticipation as to length of case?\nMR. PAGLIUCA: I would say -- I'm going to guess no more than four days, more likely two to three, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: Okay. All right.\nSo I think then -- and then we should talk about the timing of the charge conference. Have you discussed that further? You kept promising to discuss it.\nMS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\nWe haven't conferred with the defense about that. We continue to just defer to the Court's preference on timing.\nI think if the defense case is two to three days, then a charge conference at the conclusion of that would fit with the Court's timing. We're also happy to do that earlier. We don't have a preference as to the sequencing there.\nTHE COURT: Let me just look at the calendar.\nGo ahead, Ms. Sternheim.\nMS. STERNHEIM: I was just going to suggest that we utilize the Saturday that the Court said would be available.\nEven if we had more of a case, I think we could accomplish that, if the Court is still amenable.\nTHE COURT: Okay. That's fine with me.\nMS. MOE: No objection to that, your Honor.\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00013840",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 759 Filed 08/10/22 Page 249 of 267 2277 LCAVMAX8",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "you're in a position at this point to make those disclosures as if it is that person, so I did expect a full disclosure.\nWhat is the defense's anticipation as to length of case?\nMR. PAGLIUCA: I would say -- I'm going to guess no more than four days, more likely two to three, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: Okay. All right.\nSo I think then -- and then we should talk about the timing of the charge conference. Have you discussed that further? You kept promising to discuss it.\nMS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\nWe haven't conferred with the defense about that. We continue to just defer to the Court's preference on timing.\nI think if the defense case is two to three days, then a charge conference at the conclusion of that would fit with the Court's timing. We're also happy to do that earlier. We don't have a preference as to the sequencing there.\nTHE COURT: Let me just look at the calendar.\nGo ahead, Ms. Sternheim.\nMS. STERNHEIM: I was just going to suggest that we utilize the Saturday that the Court said would be available.\nEven if we had more of a case, I think we could accomplish that, if the Court is still amenable.\nTHE COURT: Okay. That's fine with me.\nMS. MOE: No objection to that, your Honor.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00013840",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. PAGLIUCA",
      "MS. MOE",
      "MS. STERNHEIM"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "759",
      "DOJ-OGR-00013840",
      "(212) 805-0300"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and readable format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}