DOJ-OGR-00008909.jpg

611 KB

Extraction Summary

3
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
3
Relationships
4
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court order
File Size: 611 KB
Summary

This is a court order filed on February 11, 2022, by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The Judge denies the defendant's motion to seal all documents related to her motion for a new trial in their entirety, ruling that sealing must be narrowly tailored. The document also references a motion to intervene by 'Juror 50' and mentions that media organizations have requested the unsealing of documents.

People (3)

Name Role Context
Alison J. Nathan District Judge
Judge issuing the order regarding sealing motions.
Ghislaine Maxwell Defendant
Defendant in the case; requested to seal motion for a new trial.
Juror 50 Juror
Filed a motion to intervene; subject of privacy concerns.

Organizations (3)

Name Type Context
United States District Court Southern District of New York
Venue of the legal proceedings.
United States of America
Government entity prosecuting the case.
Media Organizations
Filed letters seeking unsealing of documents.

Timeline (3 events)

2022-02-11
Court Order Filed
US District Court SDNY
Judge Alison J. Nathan
N/A
Motion for New Trial
US District Court SDNY
N/A
Juror 50 Motion to Intervene
US District Court SDNY

Locations (1)

Location Context
Jurisdiction of the court.

Relationships (3)

Case caption: United States of America -v- Ghislaine Maxwell
Judge issuing order in Maxwell's case
Juror 50 Legal Ghislaine Maxwell
Juror 50 filed motion to intervene; Maxwell opposes intervention

Key Quotes (4)

"Defendant’s motion to temporarily seal in their entirety all documents related to the motion for a new trial is DENIED."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00008909.jpg
Quote #1
"Any sealing of judicial documents must be narrowly tailored to serve competing interests."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00008909.jpg
Quote #2
"Protection of these interests, however, can plainly be accomplished through tailored redactions."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00008909.jpg
Quote #3
"The Defendant seeks to strike or, in the alternative, seal Juror 50’s motion."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00008909.jpg
Quote #4

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (1,632 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 596 Filed 02/11/22 Page 1 of 7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 2/11/22
United States of America,
-v-
Ghislaine Maxwell,
Defendant.
20-CR-330 (AJN)
ORDER
ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:
The Court is in receipt of the parties’ letters addressing the Defendant’s request to
temporarily seal her motion for a new trial and accompanying exhibits, and the Government’s
response in opposition and accompanying exhibits. See Dkt. Nos. 590, 594, 595. Several media
organizations have also filed letters seeking unsealing. The Court is also in receipt of Juror 50’s
motion to intervene. Both the Government and the Defendant oppose intervention. The
Defendant seeks to strike or, in the alternative, seal Juror 50’s motion.
For the reasons outlined more fully below, the Court rules as follows. First, the
Defendant’s motion to temporarily seal in their entirety all documents related to the motion for a
new trial is DENIED. Any sealing of judicial documents must be narrowly tailored to serve
competing interests. In this case, important interests include preserving the integrity of any
inquiry process going forward as well as protecting juror anonymity and privacy. Protection of
these interests, however, can plainly be accomplished through tailored redactions. Following the
Court’s resolution of the Defendant’s motion or a hearing, if one is ordered, all redactions will be
promptly unsealed except those necessary to protect any continuing interest in juror anonymity
and privacy.
1
DOJ-OGR-00008909

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document