DOJ-OGR-00017283.json 3.6 KB

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950
  1. {
  2. "document_metadata": {
  3. "page_number": "5",
  4. "document_number": "769",
  5. "date": "08/10/22",
  6. "document_type": "court transcript",
  7. "has_handwriting": false,
  8. "has_stamps": false
  9. },
  10. "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 769 Filed 08/10/22 Page 5 of 19 3096 LCLVMAXT\n1 MS. COMEY: Your Honor, what about \"3505-005 is not an admitted exhibit.\"\n2 admitted exhibit.\"\n3 MR. PAGLIUCA: If the Court is considering that, I\n4 think there needs to be a second sentence, which is, \"The\n5 testimony about 3505-005 has been provided in the transcript.\"\n6 MS. COMEY: That's redundant, your Honor. They know\n7 that; that's why they are asking the question. So I don't\n8 think it's necessary.\n9 MR. PAGLIUCA: Well, it can't really hurt if it's\n10 redundant, your Honor.\n11 THE COURT: That's true.\n12 I'm just writing it out.\n13 \"3505-005 is not an admitted exhibit. The testimony\n14 regarding 3505-005 is in the transcript you have regarding\n15 Carolyn's testimony.\"\n16 MR. PAGLIUCA: That's fine with us, your Honor.\n17 MS. COMEY: Fine with us, your Honor. Thank you.\n18 THE COURT: Okay. I'm happy to bring them out and do\n19 it orally or send in a note for efficiency.\n20 MS. COMEY: I think sending in a note will save time,\n21 your Honor, and makes sense.\n22 MR. PAGLIUCA: We agree.\n23 THE COURT: Okay. So let me just be clear.\n24 I'm going to say: I received your note regarding --\n25 I'll just say regarding 3505-005. 3505-005 is not an admitted\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  11. "text_blocks": [
  12. {
  13. "type": "printed",
  14. "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 769 Filed 08/10/22 Page 5 of 19 3096 LCLVMAXT",
  15. "position": "header"
  16. },
  17. {
  18. "type": "printed",
  19. "content": "1 MS. COMEY: Your Honor, what about \"3505-005 is not an admitted exhibit.\"\n2 admitted exhibit.\"\n3 MR. PAGLIUCA: If the Court is considering that, I\n4 think there needs to be a second sentence, which is, \"The\n5 testimony about 3505-005 has been provided in the transcript.\"\n6 MS. COMEY: That's redundant, your Honor. They know\n7 that; that's why they are asking the question. So I don't\n8 think it's necessary.\n9 MR. PAGLIUCA: Well, it can't really hurt if it's\n10 redundant, your Honor.\n11 THE COURT: That's true.\n12 I'm just writing it out.\n13 \"3505-005 is not an admitted exhibit. The testimony\n14 regarding 3505-005 is in the transcript you have regarding\n15 Carolyn's testimony.\"\n16 MR. PAGLIUCA: That's fine with us, your Honor.\n17 MS. COMEY: Fine with us, your Honor. Thank you.\n18 THE COURT: Okay. I'm happy to bring them out and do\n19 it orally or send in a note for efficiency.\n20 MS. COMEY: I think sending in a note will save time,\n21 your Honor, and makes sense.\n22 MR. PAGLIUCA: We agree.\n23 THE COURT: Okay. So let me just be clear.\n24 I'm going to say: I received your note regarding --\n25 I'll just say regarding 3505-005. 3505-005 is not an admitted",
  20. "position": "main content"
  21. },
  22. {
  23. "type": "printed",
  24. "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  25. "position": "footer"
  26. }
  27. ],
  28. "entities": {
  29. "people": [
  30. "MS. COMEY",
  31. "MR. PAGLIUCA",
  32. "Carolyn"
  33. ],
  34. "organizations": [
  35. "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
  36. ],
  37. "locations": [],
  38. "dates": [
  39. "08/10/22"
  40. ],
  41. "reference_numbers": [
  42. "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
  43. "769",
  44. "3505-005",
  45. "3096",
  46. "(212) 805-0300"
  47. ]
  48. },
  49. "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
  50. }