mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES003/DOJ-OGR-00008173.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "1",
    "document_number": "516",
    "date": "11/21/21",
    "document_type": "OPINION & ORDER",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": true
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 516 Filed 11/21/21 Page 1 of 17\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK\nUnited States of America,\n-v-\nGhislainc Maxwell,\nDefendant.\n20-CR-330 (AJN)\nOPINION & ORDER\nALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:\nThe Defense on November 1, 2021, noticed eight expert witnesses. Def. Br., Ex. 1 (\"Notice\"). Two of those experts, Dr. Park Dietz and Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, are expected to offer opinions that rebut opinions of the Government's expert witness, Dr. Lisa Rocchio. The Court on November 11, 2021, issued an Opinion and Order that denied in part and granted in part the Defense's motion to preclude Dr. Rocchio's testimony. Dkt. No. 435.\nThe Government on November 8, 2021, filed a motion to partially preclude the testimony of Dr. Dietz and Dr. Loftus. Gov't Br., Dkt. No. 424. The Defense filed a response on November 12, 2021.\nI. Legal standard\nFederal Rule of Evidence 702 governs the admissibility of expert testimony. That rule states:\nA witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:\n(a) the expert's scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;\n1\nDOJ-OGR-00008173",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 516 Filed 11/21/21 Page 1 of 17",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "United States of America,\n-v-\nGhislainc Maxwell,\nDefendant.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "stamp",
      "content": "USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: DATE FILED: 11/21/21",
      "position": "margin"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "20-CR-330 (AJN)\nOPINION & ORDER",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:\nThe Defense on November 1, 2021, noticed eight expert witnesses. Def. Br., Ex. 1 (\"Notice\"). Two of those experts, Dr. Park Dietz and Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, are expected to offer opinions that rebut opinions of the Government's expert witness, Dr. Lisa Rocchio. The Court on November 11, 2021, issued an Opinion and Order that denied in part and granted in part the Defense's motion to preclude Dr. Rocchio's testimony. Dkt. No. 435.\nThe Government on November 8, 2021, filed a motion to partially preclude the testimony of Dr. Dietz and Dr. Loftus. Gov't Br., Dkt. No. 424. The Defense filed a response on November 12, 2021.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "I. Legal standard\nFederal Rule of Evidence 702 governs the admissibility of expert testimony. That rule states:\nA witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:\n(a) the expert's scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00008173",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Alison J. Nathan",
      "Park Dietz",
      "Elizabeth Loftus",
      "Lisa Rocchio",
      "Ghislainc Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT",
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "November 1, 2021",
      "November 11, 2021",
      "November 8, 2021",
      "November 12, 2021",
      "11/21/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "516",
      "20-CR-330 (AJN)",
      "Dkt. No. 435",
      "Dkt. No. 424",
      "DOJ-OGR-00008173"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing with a stamp indicating electronic filing. The text is clear and legible, with no visible redactions or damage."
}