| 12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455 |
- {
- "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'."
- }
|