DOJ-OGR-00002205(1).jpg
394 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
5
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court order / legal filing
File Size:
394 KB
Summary
This is page 2 of a court order filed on December 23, 2020, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Judge Alison J. Nathan orders the defendant to docket redacted documents related to a renewed motion for bail by the same day, citing case law that supports redactions to protect third-party privacy interests.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Alison J. Nathan | United States District Judge |
Signatory of the order.
|
| The Defendant | Defendant |
Subject of the order; referred to as 'her' in relation to a renewed motion for bail (Implicitly Ghislaine Maxwell bas...
|
| Third Parties | Unspecified |
Mentioned regarding 'personal privacy interests' justifying redactions.
|
Organizations (5)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court |
Implied by Judge's title.
|
|
| Warner Commc'ns, Inc. |
Cited in case law (Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc.).
|
|
| 2d Cir. |
Second Circuit Court of Appeals, cited in case law.
|
|
| S.D.N.Y. |
Southern District of New York, cited in case law.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice, indicated by footer 'DOJ-OGR'.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2020-12-23
Deadline for the Defendant to docket redacted documents and corresponding exhibits.
New York, New York
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location where the order was signed and dated.
|
Relationships (1)
Judge Nathan issuing a court order to the Defendant.
Key Quotes (2)
"The Defendant is hereby ORDERED to docket the redacted documents and corresponding exhibits by no later than December 23, 2020."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002205(1).jpg
Quote #1
"proposed redactions here are narrowly tailored to serve substantial interests, including, most importantly, third parties’ personal privacy interests."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002205(1).jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (875 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 101 Filed 12/23/20 Page 2 of 2
Lugosch test. United States v. Amodeo (“Amodeo I”), 44 F.3d 141, 145 (2d Cir. 1995). And the Court also finds that the common law presumption of access attaches. Id. at 146; see also Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 602 (1978). As with the redactions to her renewed motion for bail, the proposed redactions here are narrowly tailored to serve substantial interests, including, most importantly, third parties’ personal privacy interests. See Under Seal v. Under Seal, 273 F. Supp. 3d 460, 467 (S.D.N.Y. 2017). See also Dkt. No. 95.
The Defendant is hereby ORDERED to docket the redacted documents and corresponding exhibits by no later than December 23, 2020.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 23, 2020
New York, New York
New York, New York
[Signature]
ALISON J. NATHAN
United States District Judge
ALISON J. NATHAN
United States District Judge
2
DOJ-OGR-00002205
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document