mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES008/DOJ-OGR-00020658.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "40",
    "document_number": "57",
    "date": "02/28/2023",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 22-1426, Document 57 02/28/2023, 3475900, Page40 of 208\nA-36\n2/22/23, 1:25 PM SDNY CM/ECF NextGen Version 1.6\n04/22/2021 233 LETTER by Boies Schiller Flexner LLP as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Sigrid McCawley dated 04-22-2021 re: Request to Bring Electronic Devices Document filed by Boies Schiller Flexner LLP. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Electronic Device Form)(McCawley, Sigrid) (Entered: 04/22/2021)\n04/22/2021 234 LETTER by Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Jeffrey S. Pagliuca dated April 22, 2021 re: Response to Dkt. No. 227, Governments April 21, 2021 Letter re Ms. Maxwells Motions to Suppress (Pagliuca, Jeffrey) (Entered: 04/22/2021)\n04/22/2021 235 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated April 22, 2021 re: Response to Defense Request for Adjournment Document filed by USA. (Comey, Maurene) (Entered: 04/22/2021)\n04/22/2021 236 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated April 22, 2021 re: Response to the Court's April 22, 2021 Order Document filed by USA. (Pomerantz, Lara) (Entered: 04/22/2021)\n04/22/2021 237 MEMO ENDORSEMENT as to Ghislaine Maxwell on 233 LETTER by Boies Schiller Flexner LLP as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Sigrid McCawley dated 04-22-2021 re: Request to Bring Electronic Devices Document. ENDORSEMENT: Because remote access is available for tomorrow and because no electronic devices may be used in the courtroom or overflow rooms, Dkt. No. 214, to the extent the request is for tomorrow's arraignment, that request is denied. Counsel may renew their application in advance of future proceedings. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 4/22/2021) (lnl) (Entered: 04/23/2021)\n04/23/2021 238 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault. (jus) (Entered: 04/23/2021)\n04/23/2021 239 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Alison Moe, Maurene Comey, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated April 23, 2021 re: in response to the Court's April 16, 2021 Order. Document filed by USA. (Moe, Alison) (Entered: 04/23/2021)\n04/23/2021 240 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated April 23, 2021 re: Proposed Redactions Document filed by USA. (Comey, Maurene) (Entered: 04/23/2021)\n04/23/2021 241 MEMO ENDORSEMENT as to Ghislaine Maxwell on 240 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated April 23, 2021 re: Proposed Redactions. ENDORSEMENT: The Court grants the Government's redaction requests. Its conclusion is guided by the three-part test articulated by the Second Circuit in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). Under this test, the Court must: (i) determine whether the documents in question are \"judicial documents;\" (ii) assess the weight of the common law presumption of access to the materials; and (iii) balance competing considerations against the presumption of access. Id. at 11920. The Court concludes that these are judicial documents and that the First Amendment and common law presumptions of access attach. But in balancing competing considerations against the presumption of access, the Court finds that the specific arguments the Government has put forward in this letter, including the need to protect the privacy interests of third parties referenced in the documents, favor the narrowly tailored redactions. See United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1050 (2d Cir. 1995). The Defendant and Boies Schiller are hereby ORDERED to docket the respective documents with the Government's https://ecf.nysd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?2110870152221896-L_1_0-1 36/113 DOJ-OGR-00020658",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 22-1426, Document 57 02/28/2023, 3475900, Page40 of 208",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A-36",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2/22/23, 1:25 PM SDNY CM/ECF NextGen Version 1.6",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "04/22/2021 233 LETTER by Boies Schiller Flexner LLP as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Sigrid McCawley dated 04-22-2021 re: Request to Bring Electronic Devices Document filed by Boies Schiller Flexner LLP. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Electronic Device Form)(McCawley, Sigrid) (Entered: 04/22/2021)",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "04/22/2021 234 LETTER by Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Jeffrey S. Pagliuca dated April 22, 2021 re: Response to Dkt. No. 227, Governments April 21, 2021 Letter re Ms. Maxwells Motions to Suppress (Pagliuca, Jeffrey) (Entered: 04/22/2021)",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "04/22/2021 235 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated April 22, 2021 re: Response to Defense Request for Adjournment Document filed by USA. (Comey, Maurene) (Entered: 04/22/2021)",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "04/22/2021 236 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated April 22, 2021 re: Response to the Court's April 22, 2021 Order Document filed by USA. (Pomerantz, Lara) (Entered: 04/22/2021)",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "04/22/2021 237 MEMO ENDORSEMENT as to Ghislaine Maxwell on 233 LETTER by Boies Schiller Flexner LLP as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Sigrid McCawley dated 04-22-2021 re: Request to Bring Electronic Devices Document. ENDORSEMENT: Because remote access is available for tomorrow and because no electronic devices may be used in the courtroom or overflow rooms, Dkt. No. 214, to the extent the request is for tomorrow's arraignment, that request is denied. Counsel may renew their application in advance of future proceedings. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 4/22/2021) (lnl) (Entered: 04/23/2021)",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "04/23/2021 238 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault. (jus) (Entered: 04/23/2021)",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "04/23/2021 239 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Alison Moe, Maurene Comey, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated April 23, 2021 re: in response to the Court's April 16, 2021 Order. Document filed by USA. (Moe, Alison) (Entered: 04/23/2021)",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "04/23/2021 240 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated April 23, 2021 re: Proposed Redactions Document filed by USA. (Comey, Maurene) (Entered: 04/23/2021)",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "04/23/2021 241 MEMO ENDORSEMENT as to Ghislaine Maxwell on 240 LETTER by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated April 23, 2021 re: Proposed Redactions. ENDORSEMENT: The Court grants the Government's redaction requests. Its conclusion is guided by the three-part test articulated by the Second Circuit in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). Under this test, the Court must: (i) determine whether the documents in question are \"judicial documents;\" (ii) assess the weight of the common law presumption of access to the materials; and (iii) balance competing considerations against the presumption of access. Id. at 11920. The Court concludes that these are judicial documents and that the First Amendment and common law presumptions of access attach. But in balancing competing considerations against the presumption of access, the Court finds that the specific arguments the Government has put forward in this letter, including the need to protect the privacy interests of third parties referenced in the documents, favor the narrowly tailored redactions. See United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1050 (2d Cir. 1995). The Defendant and Boies Schiller are hereby ORDERED to docket the respective documents with the Government's",
      "position": "body"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ghislaine Maxwell",
      "Alison J. Nathan",
      "Sigrid McCawley",
      "Jeffrey S. Pagliuca",
      "Maurene Comey",
      "Alison Moe",
      "Lara Pomerantz",
      "Andrew Rohrbach"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Boies Schiller Flexner LLP",
      "USA"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "SDNY"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "04/22/2021",
      "04/23/2021",
      "02/28/2023",
      "April 16, 2021",
      "April 21, 2021",
      "April 22, 2021",
      "April 23, 2021"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 22-1426",
      "Document 57",
      "3475900",
      "Dkt. No. 227",
      "Dkt. No. 214"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court docket sheet from the Southern District of New York (SDNY) related to the case of Ghislaine Maxwell. The document contains a list of filings and orders made in the case between April 22, 2021, and April 23, 2021. The document is a printed record and does not contain any handwritten text or stamps."
}