mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES007/DOJ-OGR-00019284.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "3",
    "document_number": "16",
    "date": "09/10/2020",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 20-3061, Document 16, 09/10/2020, 2928287, Page3 of 5\n\nJudge Nathan refusing to modify a criminal protective order. The civil case addresses an order by Judge Preska unsealing certain deposition material.\n\nAmong other arguments for consolidation of the two appeals, Ms. Maxwell contends that she should be permitted to share with Judge Preska critical information Ms. Maxwell learned from Judge Nathan.\n\nBut the protective order issued by Judge Nathan prevents Ms. Maxwell from disclosing this information to Judge Preska or from telling this Court about the information in the civil appeal. By contrast, the protective order allows Ms. Maxwell to tell this Court about the information in the criminal appeal, though only under seal since it is confidential and sealed in the district court criminal case.\n\nMs. Maxwell's Unredacted Motion to Consolidate explains this situation and describes the critical information. But to comply with criminal protective order, Ms. Maxwell can file an unredacted copy of the Motion to Consolidate only under seal with this Court, and then only in the criminal appeal, Case No. 20-3061.\n\nTherefore, in compliance with the criminal protective order, Ms. Maxwell will publicly file on ECF a redacted copy of the Motion to Consolidate in both appeals along with all but one of the exhibits—Exhibit B, which was filed under seal in the district court.\n\n2\nDOJ-OGR-00019284",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 20-3061, Document 16, 09/10/2020, 2928287, Page3 of 5",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Judge Nathan refusing to modify a criminal protective order. The civil case addresses an order by Judge Preska unsealing certain deposition material.\n\nAmong other arguments for consolidation of the two appeals, Ms. Maxwell contends that she should be permitted to share with Judge Preska critical information Ms. Maxwell learned from Judge Nathan.\n\nBut the protective order issued by Judge Nathan prevents Ms. Maxwell from disclosing this information to Judge Preska or from telling this Court about the information in the civil appeal. By contrast, the protective order allows Ms. Maxwell to tell this Court about the information in the criminal appeal, though only under seal since it is confidential and sealed in the district court criminal case.\n\nMs. Maxwell's Unredacted Motion to Consolidate explains this situation and describes the critical information. But to comply with criminal protective order, Ms. Maxwell can file an unredacted copy of the Motion to Consolidate only under seal with this Court, and then only in the criminal appeal, Case No. 20-3061.\n\nTherefore, in compliance with the criminal protective order, Ms. Maxwell will publicly file on ECF a redacted copy of the Motion to Consolidate in both appeals along with all but one of the exhibits—Exhibit B, which was filed under seal in the district court.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00019284",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Judge Nathan",
      "Judge Preska",
      "Ms. Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "09/10/2020"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 20-3061",
      "Document 16",
      "2928287",
      "Case No. 20-3061",
      "DOJ-OGR-00019284"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a case involving Ms. Maxwell. The text discusses the consolidation of two appeals and the handling of confidential information under a protective order. The document is a printed text with no handwritten content or stamps."
}