mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00008976.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "1",
    "document_number": "607",
    "date": "02/24/22",
    "document_type": "Court Order",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": true
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 607 Filed 02/24/22 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK United States of America, -v- Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant. ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge: The Court is in receipt of the Defendant's proposed redactions revised in response to this Court's order. See Dkt. Nos. 605, 606. The Court has reviewed the proposed redactions and concludes that they are in accordance with its prior orders. See Dkt. Nos. 596, 605. The narrowly tailored redactions further the important interests of helping ensure the integrity of any inquiry and maintaining juror anonymity and privacy. As the Court explained in its February 11 Order, these interests justify redaction of the questions the parties propose be asked at any hearing and specific factual information developed by the parties that has not been publicly reported in the press and that the parties propose be inquired about at any forthcoming hearing. Dkt. No. 596 at 4 (citing United States v. McCoy et al., No. 14 Cr. 6181 (EAW), Dkt. No. 312 (text order) (W.D.N.Y. May 26, 2017); id. Dkt. No. 329 at 38-39; Press-Enter. Co. v. Superior Ct. of Cal., Riverside Cnty., 464 U.S. 501, 511-12 (1984)). Accordingly, the parties are ORDERED to docket the redacted briefs, accompanying exhibits, and their January 13 letters, by February 25, 2022. The Court will docket Juror 50's motion. 1 DOJ-OGR-00008976",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 607 Filed 02/24/22 Page 1 of 2",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "United States of America, -v- Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Court is in receipt of the Defendant's proposed redactions revised in response to this Court's order. See Dkt. Nos. 605, 606. The Court has reviewed the proposed redactions and concludes that they are in accordance with its prior orders. See Dkt. Nos. 596, 605. The narrowly tailored redactions further the important interests of helping ensure the integrity of any inquiry and maintaining juror anonymity and privacy. As the Court explained in its February 11 Order, these interests justify redaction of the questions the parties propose be asked at any hearing and specific factual information developed by the parties that has not been publicly reported in the press and that the parties propose be inquired about at any forthcoming hearing. Dkt. No. 596 at 4 (citing United States v. McCoy et al., No. 14 Cr. 6181 (EAW), Dkt. No. 312 (text order) (W.D.N.Y. May 26, 2017); id. Dkt. No. 329 at 38-39; Press-Enter. Co. v. Superior Ct. of Cal., Riverside Cnty., 464 U.S. 501, 511-12 (1984)). Accordingly, the parties are ORDERED to docket the redacted briefs, accompanying exhibits, and their January 13 letters, by February 25, 2022. The Court will docket Juror 50's motion.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00008976",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "stamp",
      "content": "USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: DATE FILED: 2/24/22",
      "position": "margin"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ghislaine Maxwell",
      "Alison J. Nathan"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "United States District Court",
      "United States of America"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York",
      "Riverside County",
      "California"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "02/24/22",
      "February 25, 2022",
      "January 13",
      "February 11",
      "May 26, 2017",
      "1984"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 607",
      "Dkt. Nos. 605, 606",
      "Dkt. Nos. 596, 605",
      "Dkt. No. 596",
      "No. 14 Cr. 6181 (EAW)",
      "Dkt. No. 312",
      "Dkt. No. 329",
      "464 U.S. 501"
    ]
  },
  "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, typed document with no handwritten text. The stamp in the top-right corner indicates that it was electronically filed."
}