mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES001/DOJ-OGR-00002476.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "10",
    "document_number": "136-9",
    "date": "02/04/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 136-9 Filed 02/04/21 Page 10 of 33\n1 not do so. The Court ordered Doe 1's transcript released after\n2 undertaking a particularized review of that transcript and\n3 finding that the presumption of public access warranted\n4 unsealing. Having received no normal objection from Does 1 or\n5 2, the Court cannot discern a justification for continued\n6 sealing of their names in this case's documents. Accordingly,\n7 the names and identifying information for Does 1 and 2 should\n8 be unsealed.\n9\n10 Additionally, Alan Dershowitz's name and information\n11 identifying him may be unsealed. By his letter at docket entry\n12 1138, he has requested that redactions of his name in these\n13 materials be unsealed in all cases.\n14\n15 Finally, excerpts of any deposition testimony for\n16 nonparty Does in the Court of Appeals that has already been\n17 unsealed may be unsealed here also with redactions, if any,\n18 ordered by the Court of Appeals.\n19\n20 For efficiency, I will not repeat this caveat as to\n21 each document; I will only comment when it is not applicable.\n22 Unless there is a specific comment, personal identifying\n23 information for all nonparty Does should be redacted, with the\n24 exception of Does 1 and 2, Professor Dershowitz, and in\n25 deposition testimony already unsealed by the Court of Appeals.\n26\n27 The other names of Does and identifying information\n28 will remain sealed until we move to particularized\n29 consideration of those Does.\n30\n31 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n32 (212) 805-0300\n33\nDOJ-OGR-00002476",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 136-9 Filed 02/04/21 Page 10 of 33",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 not do so. The Court ordered Doe 1's transcript released after\n2 undertaking a particularized review of that transcript and\n3 finding that the presumption of public access warranted\n4 unsealing. Having received no normal objection from Does 1 or\n5 2, the Court cannot discern a justification for continued\n6 sealing of their names in this case's documents. Accordingly,\n7 the names and identifying information for Does 1 and 2 should\n8 be unsealed.\n9\n10 Additionally, Alan Dershowitz's name and information\n11 identifying him may be unsealed. By his letter at docket entry\n12 1138, he has requested that redactions of his name in these\n13 materials be unsealed in all cases.\n14\n15 Finally, excerpts of any deposition testimony for\n16 nonparty Does in the Court of Appeals that has already been\n17 unsealed may be unsealed here also with redactions, if any,\n18 ordered by the Court of Appeals.\n19\n20 For efficiency, I will not repeat this caveat as to\n21 each document; I will only comment when it is not applicable.\n22 Unless there is a specific comment, personal identifying\n23 information for all nonparty Does should be redacted, with the\n24 exception of Does 1 and 2, Professor Dershowitz, and in\n25 deposition testimony already unsealed by the Court of Appeals.\n26\n27 The other names of Does and identifying information\n28 will remain sealed until we move to particularized\n29 consideration of those Does.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00002476",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Alan Dershowitz",
      "Does 1",
      "Does 2"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Court of Appeals",
      "Southern District Reporters, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "02/04/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "136-9",
      "1138",
      "DOJ-OGR-00002476"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing with a clear and legible text. There are no visible redactions or damage to the document."
}