mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES001/DOJ-OGR-00000738.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "2",
    "document_number": "63",
    "date": "07/22/25",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 63 Filed 07/22/25 Page 2 of 4\n\nIn re Craig, 131 F.3d at 102; see also id. at 104 (\"The discretion of a trial court in deciding whether to make public the ordinarily secret proceedings of a grand jury investigation is one of the broadest and most sensitive exercises of careful judgment that a trial judge can make.\") The Second Circuit has identified the following factors for district courts to weigh where considering applications for disclosure:\n\n- the identity of the party seeking disclosure;\n- whether the defendant to the grand jury proceeding or the Government opposes the disclosure;\n- why disclosure is being sought in the particular case;\n- what specific information is being sought for disclosure;\n- how long ago the grand jury proceedings took place;\n- the current status of the principals of the grand jury proceedings and that of their families;\n- the extent to which the desired material has been previously made public;\n- whether witnesses to the grand jury proceedings who might be affected by disclosure are still alive; and\n- [whether there is an] additional need for maintaining secrecy in the particular case in question.\n\nId. at 106 (capitalization altered); see also Laws.' Comm. for 9/11 Inquiry, Inc. v. Garland, 43 F.4th 276, 285 (2d Cir. 2022) (affirming district court's application of those factors).\n\n2016). Other circuits have taken a much narrower view of a district court's authority. See, e.g., McKeever v. Barr, 920 F.3d 842, 843, 850 (D.C. Cir. 2019), cert. denied, 140 S. Ct. 597 (2020); Pitch v. United States, 953 F.3d 1226, 1241 (11th Cir. 2020) (en banc); United States v. McDougal, 559 F.3d 837, 841 (8th Cir. 2009); In re Grand Jury 89-4-72, 932 F.2d 481, 488 (6th Cir. 1991).\n\n2\n\nDOJ-OGR-00000738",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 63 Filed 07/22/25 Page 2 of 4",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "In re Craig, 131 F.3d at 102; see also id. at 104 (\"The discretion of a trial court in deciding whether to make public the ordinarily secret proceedings of a grand jury investigation is one of the broadest and most sensitive exercises of careful judgment that a trial judge can make.\") The Second Circuit has identified the following factors for district courts to weigh where considering applications for disclosure:",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "- the identity of the party seeking disclosure;\n- whether the defendant to the grand jury proceeding or the Government opposes the disclosure;\n- why disclosure is being sought in the particular case;\n- what specific information is being sought for disclosure;\n- how long ago the grand jury proceedings took place;\n- the current status of the principals of the grand jury proceedings and that of their families;\n- the extent to which the desired material has been previously made public;\n- whether witnesses to the grand jury proceedings who might be affected by disclosure are still alive; and\n- [whether there is an] additional need for maintaining secrecy in the particular case in question.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Id. at 106 (capitalization altered); see also Laws.' Comm. for 9/11 Inquiry, Inc. v. Garland, 43 F.4th 276, 285 (2d Cir. 2022) (affirming district court's application of those factors).",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2016). Other circuits have taken a much narrower view of a district court's authority. See, e.g., McKeever v. Barr, 920 F.3d 842, 843, 850 (D.C. Cir. 2019), cert. denied, 140 S. Ct. 597 (2020); Pitch v. United States, 953 F.3d 1226, 1241 (11th Cir. 2020) (en banc); United States v. McDougal, 559 F.3d 837, 841 (8th Cir. 2009); In re Grand Jury 89-4-72, 932 F.2d 481, 488 (6th Cir. 1991).",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00000738",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Craig",
      "Barr",
      "Garland",
      "McKeever",
      "Pitch",
      "McDougal"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Second Circuit",
      "Government",
      "Laws.' Comm. for 9/11 Inquiry, Inc.",
      "United States"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "07/22/25",
      "2016",
      "2019",
      "2020",
      "2009",
      "1991"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:19-cr-00490-RMB",
      "Document 63",
      "131 F.3d",
      "43 F.4th 276",
      "920 F.3d 842",
      "140 S. Ct. 597",
      "953 F.3d 1226",
      "559 F.3d 837",
      "932 F.2d 481",
      "DOJ-OGR-00000738"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing with a clear and legible text. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}