mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES008/DOJ-OGR-00020914.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "88",
    "document_number": "58",
    "date": "02/28/2023",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 22-1426, Document 58, 02/28/2023, 3475901, Page 88 of 221\nA-288\n50\nTHE COURT: All right. I think simultaneous briefing is appropriate. For one, I have responsive briefing on the legal issues, and so really what we're talking about is argument following on today's record.\nOne week from today, the 15th. Simultaneous briefing.\nI don't care if you call it letter briefing or otherwise. All I care is that it's double-spaced so I can read it on my iPad. Fifteen pages max per side.\nMS. POGARNTZ: No, your Honor. Thank you.\nMS. STERNHEIM: Anything else from the government? I would just request that our submission of questions which was sent to chambers be made a part of this record.\nTHE COURT: Yes.\nAs I've said, I will docket everything.\nThere's identifying information of Juror 50 in your submitted questions. So that needs to be redacted.\nBut other than Juror 50 identifying information, the redactions for all materials, I believe, for all materials based on the post-trial briefing and the submitted questions can be publicly docketed so correctly.\nAs well as my opinion had two lines of redactions. So I'll docket my opinion without redactions.\nI'll ask the parties to actually, I think we can handle the redactions for identifying information.\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n49\nThe parties' briefing. I'll ask you to submit the briefs with redactions only for protecting juror privacy and juror identity.\nMS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: By tomorrow?\nMS. STERNHEIM: Yes.\nTHE COURT: Thank you.\nSo that will put everything on the record. As for today's hearing, the only thing that's redacted is Juror 50's name. And that's redacted on the immunity materials, as well as Mr. Spodek's letter just indicated \"Juror 50.\"\nMS. STERNHEIM: Anything further, Ms. Moe?\nTHE COURT: Not at this time.\nMS. MOE: No, your Honor. Thank you.\nTHE COURT: All right. We're adjourned.\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\nDOJ-OGR-00020914",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 22-1426, Document 58, 02/28/2023, 3475901, Page 88 of 221",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A-288",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "50\nTHE COURT: All right. I think simultaneous briefing is appropriate. For one, I have responsive briefing on the legal issues, and so really what we're talking about is argument following on today's record.\nOne week from today, the 15th. Simultaneous briefing.\nI don't care if you call it letter briefing or otherwise. All I care is that it's double-spaced so I can read it on my iPad. Fifteen pages max per side.\nMS. POGARNTZ: No, your Honor. Thank you.\nMS. STERNHEIM: Anything else from the government? I would just request that our submission of questions which was sent to chambers be made a part of this record.\nTHE COURT: Yes.\nAs I've said, I will docket everything.\nThere's identifying information of Juror 50 in your submitted questions. So that needs to be redacted.\nBut other than Juror 50 identifying information, the redactions for all materials, I believe, for all materials based on the post-trial briefing and the submitted questions can be publicly docketed so correctly.\nAs well as my opinion had two lines of redactions. So I'll docket my opinion without redactions.\nI'll ask the parties to actually, I think we can handle the redactions for identifying information.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "margin"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "49\nThe parties' briefing. I'll ask you to submit the briefs with redactions only for protecting juror privacy and juror identity.\nMS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: By tomorrow?\nMS. STERNHEIM: Yes.\nTHE COURT: Thank you.\nSo that will put everything on the record. As for today's hearing, the only thing that's redacted is Juror 50's name. And that's redacted on the immunity materials, as well as Mr. Spodek's letter just indicated \"Juror 50.\"\nMS. STERNHEIM: Anything further, Ms. Moe?\nTHE COURT: Not at this time.\nMS. MOE: No, your Honor. Thank you.\nTHE COURT: All right. We're adjourned.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "margin"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00020914",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MS. POGARNTZ",
      "MS. STERNHEIM",
      "MS. MOE",
      "Mr. Spodek"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "02/28/2023",
      "the 15th"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 22-1426",
      "Document 58",
      "3475901",
      "Page 88 of 221",
      "A-288",
      "DOJ-OGR-00020914"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with some redactions. The quality is generally good, but there are some minor formatting issues."
}