DOJ-OGR-00004900.jpg
1.54 MB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
1.54 MB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from July 2, 2021, detailing a conversation between Mr. Rossmiller and a judge regarding a protective order over sealed documents from a settled libel lawsuit. The judge expresses reluctance to uphold the order, citing the Second Circuit's apparent criticism of Judge Sweet for failing to conduct a detailed inquiry into the confidentiality of each document. The core issue is whether the sealed litigation materials should remain confidential.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MR. ROSSMILLER | Counsel (implied) |
A speaker in the transcript, addressing the court regarding a protective order and discovery materials.
|
| Judge Sweet | Judge |
Mentioned as the judge who issued a protective order that the Second Circuit was critical of.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
A speaker in the transcript, presiding over the proceeding and discussing the protective order with Mr. Rossmiller.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Second Circuit | government agency |
Mentioned as the court that heard a case involving the litigation documents and was critical of Judge Sweet's handlin...
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed in the footer as the court reporting service.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2021-07-02
A discussion took place regarding a protective order for sealed documents in a libel lawsuit. The presiding judge questioned the validity of the order, referencing criticism from the Second Circuit about a lack of specific justification for sealing the documents.
Courtroom (implied)
Relationships (1)
Mr. Rossmiller addresses the judge as 'your Honor' and they engage in a formal legal discussion, indicating a lawyer-judge relationship within a court proceeding.
Key Quotes (3)
"I think the only thing that's at issue in the case that the Second Circuit has heard is the publicly -- only here, not publicly -- filed litigation documents, which is essentially a lawsuit, a libel action that has been filed and litigated under seal."Source
— THE COURT
(Clarifying the specific documents and case that were reviewed by the Second Circuit.)
DOJ-OGR-00004900.jpg
Quote #1
"And I'm struggling with this for two reasons. First of all, it's like how much deference to give to this protective order that was issued by some judge, not myself..."Source
— THE COURT
(Expressing hesitation and reasoning for questioning the existing protective order.)
DOJ-OGR-00004900.jpg
Quote #2
"...it seemed like they were being critical of Judge Sweet for not having a particularized inquiry into each document that was sought to be filed in accordance with the protective order as to why this contained confidential"Source
— THE COURT
(Explaining the basis for questioning the protective order, citing the Second Circuit's apparent criticism of the original judge's actions.)
DOJ-OGR-00004900.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,559 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 311-1 Filed 07/02/21 Page 7 of 23
6
Xj3qlgra
SEALED
SEALED
1 protective order is overturned in some way, that those would be
2 redacted as to individuals' names, personally identifying
3 information --
4 THE COURT: Probably.
5 MR. ROSSMILLER: -- which I would expect, your Honor.
6 I don't believe that any indication is that the underlying
7 discovery materials are likely to be unsealed, and I'm not sure
8 whether that's at issue, but in any event --
9 THE COURT: I don't think it is. I think the only
10 thing that's at issue in the case that the Second Circuit has
11 heard is the publicly -- only here, not publicly -- filed
12 litigation documents, which is essentially a lawsuit, a libel
13 action that has been filed and litigated under seal. It was
14 settled by terms that would have expired because the protective
15 order doesn't extend until it goes on to a trial, but there
16 wasn't a trial.
17 And I'm struggling with this for two reasons.
18 First of all, it's like how much deference to give to
19 this protective order that was issued by some judge, not
20 myself, on the basis of I don't know what, except that from the
21 questions that the Second Circuit asked about the litigation
22 documents, it seemed like they were being critical of Judge
23 Sweet for not having a particularized inquiry into each
24 document that was sought to be filed in accordance with the
25 protective order as to why this contained confidential
2 redacted as to individuals' names, personally identifying
3 information --
4 THE COURT: Probably.
5 MR. ROSSMILLER: -- which I would expect, your Honor.
6 I don't believe that any indication is that the underlying
7 discovery materials are likely to be unsealed, and I'm not sure
8 whether that's at issue, but in any event --
9 THE COURT: I don't think it is. I think the only
10 thing that's at issue in the case that the Second Circuit has
11 heard is the publicly -- only here, not publicly -- filed
12 litigation documents, which is essentially a lawsuit, a libel
13 action that has been filed and litigated under seal. It was
14 settled by terms that would have expired because the protective
15 order doesn't extend until it goes on to a trial, but there
16 wasn't a trial.
17 And I'm struggling with this for two reasons.
18 First of all, it's like how much deference to give to
19 this protective order that was issued by some judge, not
20 myself, on the basis of I don't know what, except that from the
21 questions that the Second Circuit asked about the litigation
22 documents, it seemed like they were being critical of Judge
23 Sweet for not having a particularized inquiry into each
24 document that was sought to be filed in accordance with the
25 protective order as to why this contained confidential
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
SDNY_GM_00000858
DOJ-OGR-00004900
(212) 805-0300
SDNY_GM_00000858
DOJ-OGR-00004900
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document