{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "50",
    "document_number": "737",
    "date": "07/22/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 737 Filed 07/22/22 Page 50 of 101\nM6SQmax1\nthe table is more than 5, as 5 levels. And, thus, the total number would be 36.\nTHE COURT: I presume you agree with that, Mr. Everdell?\nMR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: Under the 2003 manual -- I see. The highest total offense level, increase by 4 from 32 to 36.\nMS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. Thank you.\nTHE COURT: Thank you, Ms. Moe. And that produces a guideline range 188 to 235.\nMS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\nMR. EVERDELL: We agree with that, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: Thank you. Same question to you, Mr. Everdell. Preserving your objections, of course, but anything new based on what I said?\nMR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor. I don't think because the government's response was the one added their request to add Virginia and Melissa as separate groups, so we do object to that. I know the Court has already ruled on that. We don't think the record is adequate to make them separate offense groups. I understand the Court has already ruled on that, but we would like to preserve that objection.\nTHE COURT: Understood. Thank you.\nDo you want to respond, Ms. Moe?\nMS. MOE: Your Honor, I think the Court's rulings\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00011569",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 737 Filed 07/22/22 Page 50 of 101",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "M6SQmax1\nthe table is more than 5, as 5 levels. And, thus, the total number would be 36.\nTHE COURT: I presume you agree with that, Mr. Everdell?\nMR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: Under the 2003 manual -- I see. The highest total offense level, increase by 4 from 32 to 36.\nMS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. Thank you.\nTHE COURT: Thank you, Ms. Moe. And that produces a guideline range 188 to 235.\nMS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\nMR. EVERDELL: We agree with that, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: Thank you. Same question to you, Mr. Everdell. Preserving your objections, of course, but anything new based on what I said?\nMR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor. I don't think because the government's response was the one added their request to add Virginia and Melissa as separate groups, so we do object to that. I know the Court has already ruled on that. We don't think the record is adequate to make them separate offense groups. I understand the Court has already ruled on that, but we would like to preserve that objection.\nTHE COURT: Understood. Thank you.\nDo you want to respond, Ms. Moe?\nMS. MOE: Your Honor, I think the Court's rulings",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00011569",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Mr. Everdell",
      "Ms. Moe",
      "Virginia",
      "Melissa"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "07/22/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "737",
      "DOJ-OGR-00011569"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}