mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES001/DOJ-OGR-00002799.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "1",
    "document_number": "172",
    "date": "03/24/21",
    "document_type": "Court Order",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": true
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 172 Filed 03/24/21 Page 1 of 3\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK\nUnited States of America,\n-v-\nGhislainc Maxwell,\nDefendant.\n20-CR-330 (AJN)\nORDER\nALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:\nOn March 5, 2021, Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell submitted to the Court an application for an order authorizing a subpoena pursuant to Rule 17(c)(3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The proposed subpoena was directed at a law firm that represents alleged victims of the Defendant. As is standard for Rule 17(c) subpoenas, the application was made ex parte and under seal on the ground that it reveals defense strategy. See e.g., United States v. Skelos, No. 15-CR-317 (KMW), 2018 WL 2254538, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. May 17, 2018), aff'd, 988 F.3d 645 (2d Cir. 2021); United States v. Wey, 252 F. Supp. 3d 237, 243 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); United States v. Earls, No. 03-CR-0364 (NRB), 2004 WL 350725, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 25, 2004); United States v. Reyes, 162 F.R.D. 468, 470 (S.D.N.Y. 1995).\nRule 17(c)(3) provides that \"[a]fter [an indictment] is filed, a subpoena requiring the production of personal or confidential information about a victim may be served on a third party only by court order,\" but \"[b]efore entering the order and unless there are exceptional circumstances, the court must require giving notice to the victim so that the victim can move to quash or modify the subpoena or otherwise object.\" Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c)(3). Consistent with the Rule, on March 12, 2021, in a sealed ex parte Order, the Court required defense counsel to provide notice to alleged victims whose personal or confidential information may be disclosed\n1\nDOJ-OGR-00002799",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 172 Filed 03/24/21 Page 1 of 3",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "United States of America,\n-v-\nGhislainc Maxwell,\nDefendant.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "20-CR-330 (AJN)\nORDER",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:\nOn March 5, 2021, Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell submitted to the Court an application for an order authorizing a subpoena pursuant to Rule 17(c)(3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The proposed subpoena was directed at a law firm that represents alleged victims of the Defendant. As is standard for Rule 17(c) subpoenas, the application was made ex parte and under seal on the ground that it reveals defense strategy. See e.g., United States v. Skelos, No. 15-CR-317 (KMW), 2018 WL 2254538, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. May 17, 2018), aff'd, 988 F.3d 645 (2d Cir. 2021); United States v. Wey, 252 F. Supp. 3d 237, 243 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); United States v. Earls, No. 03-CR-0364 (NRB), 2004 WL 350725, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 25, 2004); United States v. Reyes, 162 F.R.D. 468, 470 (S.D.N.Y. 1995).\nRule 17(c)(3) provides that \"[a]fter [an indictment] is filed, a subpoena requiring the production of personal or confidential information about a victim may be served on a third party only by court order,\" but \"[b]efore entering the order and unless there are exceptional circumstances, the court must require giving notice to the victim so that the victim can move to quash or modify the subpoena or otherwise object.\" Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c)(3). Consistent with the Rule, on March 12, 2021, in a sealed ex parte Order, the Court required defense counsel to provide notice to alleged victims whose personal or confidential information may be disclosed",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00002799",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "stamp",
      "content": "USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: DATE FILED: 3/24/21",
      "position": "margin"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ghislaine Maxwell",
      "Alison J. Nathan"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "United States District Court",
      "Southern District of New York"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "March 5, 2021",
      "March 12, 2021",
      "May 17, 2018",
      "February 25, 2004"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 172",
      "20-CR-330 (AJN)",
      "15-CR-317 (KMW)",
      "03-CR-0364 (NRB)"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document is a court order from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. It appears to be a formal legal document with proper formatting and citations. There are no visible redactions or damage to the document."
}