mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES002/DOJ-OGR-00003747.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "12 of 15",
    "document_number": "208-2",
    "date": "04/16/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 208-2 Filed 04/16/21 Page 12 of 15\nCase 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 280 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/02/2015 Page 11 of 14\nnew victims will simply join in a single summary judgment motion that the current victims anticipate filing after discovery has been completed.\nNor will adding the new victims prejudice the United States. As the court is aware, this Court is still in its initial discovery stage. The Court is currently considering whether to reject the Government's assertion of privilege over documents regarding the case. See DE 265 (victims' reassertion of objections to the Government privilege claims). The new victims do not seek any additional discovery beyond that previously sought by the current victims.2\nAccordingly, the United States will not be prejudiced or burdened by adding them to this case.\nThe CVRA does not contain any statute of limitations for filing an action to enforce rights under the statute. Accordingly, were the Court to deny this motion, the result might be that the new victims would then be forced to file a separate suit raising their claims, which would then possibly proceed on a separate litigation track. Rather than require duplicative litigation, the Court should simply grant their motion to join.\nJane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 support the joinder motion. Counsel for the victims have discussed this motion with the Government at length in an effort to avoid any need to file a substantive pleading on the issue. Counsel for the victims asked the Government during the summer for its position on joinder. The Government, however, took the matter under advisement for months. Ultimately, after several inquiries from victims counsel, the Government indicated without explanation that it opposes this motion. Counsel for the victims has requested a meeting with the Government on this issue, which will hopefully occur in\n2 Jane Doe #3 and Jane Doe #4 have asked the Government to provide them with the record of their statements that they provided to the FBI. These FBI 302's should be only a few pages long.\n11\nGIUFFRE 004298\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDOJ-OGR-00003747",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 208-2 Filed 04/16/21 Page 12 of 15",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 280 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/02/2015 Page 11 of 14",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "new victims will simply join in a single summary judgment motion that the current victims anticipate filing after discovery has been completed.\nNor will adding the new victims prejudice the United States. As the court is aware, this Court is still in its initial discovery stage. The Court is currently considering whether to reject the Government's assertion of privilege over documents regarding the case. See DE 265 (victims' reassertion of objections to the Government privilege claims). The new victims do not seek any additional discovery beyond that previously sought by the current victims.2\nAccordingly, the United States will not be prejudiced or burdened by adding them to this case.\nThe CVRA does not contain any statute of limitations for filing an action to enforce rights under the statute. Accordingly, were the Court to deny this motion, the result might be that the new victims would then be forced to file a separate suit raising their claims, which would then possibly proceed on a separate litigation track. Rather than require duplicative litigation, the Court should simply grant their motion to join.",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 support the joinder motion. Counsel for the victims have discussed this motion with the Government at length in an effort to avoid any need to file a substantive pleading on the issue. Counsel for the victims asked the Government during the summer for its position on joinder. The Government, however, took the matter under advisement for months. Ultimately, after several inquiries from victims counsel, the Government indicated without explanation that it opposes this motion. Counsel for the victims has requested a meeting with the Government on this issue, which will hopefully occur in",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2 Jane Doe #3 and Jane Doe #4 have asked the Government to provide them with the record of their statements that they provided to the FBI. These FBI 302's should be only a few pages long.",
      "position": "footnote"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "11",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "GIUFFRE 004298\nCONFIDENTIAL",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00003747",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jane Doe #1",
      "Jane Doe #2",
      "Jane Doe #3",
      "Jane Doe #4"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "FBI",
      "Government"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "04/16/21",
      "01/02/2015"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "208-2",
      "280",
      "265",
      "GIUFFRE 004298",
      "DOJ-OGR-00003747"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a case involving multiple Jane Doe plaintiffs. The text discusses the joinder motion and the Government's opposition to it. The document contains a footnote with additional information about the plaintiffs' requests to the Government."
}