…The Court Should Unseal Portions of Docket Entries the Second Circuit Already Released. .................................................................................................................................... 6 III. The Court Should Unseal Portions of Documents Mentioning Doe 1 and Doe 2. ... 6 IV. …
…and it is my understanding that you represent Ghislaine Maxwell. I am working on an article about the legal fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein case. I anticipate mentioning the lawsuit filed earlier this year by Virginia Roberts Guiffee against Ms…
…and it is my understanding that you represent Ghislaine Maxwell. I am working on an article about the legal fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein case. I anticipate mentioning the lawsuit filed earlier this year by Virginia Roberts Guiffee against Ms…
…and it is my understanding that you represent Ghislaine Maxwell. I am working on an article about the legal fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein case. I anticipate mentioning the lawsuit filed earlier this year by Virginia Roberts Guiffee against Ms…
…and it is my understanding that you represent Ghislaine Maxwell. I am working on an article about the legal fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein case. I anticipate mentioning the lawsuit filed earlier this year by Virginia Roberts Guiffee against Ms…
…nevertheless, important to the public's interest in 17 monitoring federal courts' exercise of their Article III powers 18 that the public review the documents. 19 With this presumption of public access in mind, the 20 Court turns to the…
…s identity, failing to “include a ‘particularized’ or ‘individualized’ review” of materials to balance the public’s interest in monitoring federal courts’ exercise of their powers against “countervailing private interests,” and “failing to consider international comity.” Doe 171 Br. at…
…nor Doe 2 requested Excerpts under the Protocol, the Original Parties submitted their own briefs, and the Court ruled that the first five motions, including portions of those documents mentioning Doe 1 or Doe 2, should be unsealed. ECF No…
…2019). 4. Notice of Appellate Rights: The Protocol will include the provision notifying non-parties of their appellate rights with respect to any decision to unseal a document mentioning their name. That provision will provide that “[a]n order from…
…for a 15 dispositive motion. It's nevertheless important to the 16 public's interest in monitoring federal courts' exercise of 17 their Article III powers. 18 With this presumption of public access in mind, the 19 Court turns to…
…for a 15 dispositive motion. It's nevertheless important to the 16 public's interest in monitoring federal courts' exercise of 17 their Article III powers. 18 With this presumption of public access in mind, the 19 Court turns to…
…and it is my understanding that you represent Ghislaine Maxwell. I am working on an article about the legal fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein case. I anticipate mentioning the lawsuit filed earlier this year by Virginia Roberts Guiffee against Ms…
…concerns may be help explain the Doe 1 email. These two Does cannot properly formulate their objections or non- objections until they have had a chance to review the excerpts mentioning them. For example, they don’t really know how…
…respect to such evidentiary and discovery matters can cause substantial harm” and that such motions “are therefore of value to those monitoring the federal court,” rendering them “subject to at least some presumption of public access.” 929 F.3d at…
…order explaining that the Court is “amenable to unsealing portions of documents mentioning non-parties rather than waiting to unseal the entirety of a given document until all non-parties have provided input” and that [t]his will hopefully allow…
…case. The Court should not allow such callous abuse of a First Amendment right, particularly as there is no merit to Dershowitz’s claim (Br. at 21) that ‘public monitoring has an important role to play here.’” Id. at 19…
…Access. In their reply submission, Doe 144 again presents three principal reasons that the Court should not unseal material mentioning them: (1) that the presumption of public access here is low; (2) that any public value of the material is…
…redactions of yet-to-be-noticed Non-Party names (if any) Unseal in full (no applicable Brown minimal redactions or yet- 165-11 to-be-noticed Non-Party names) Unseal portions mentioning Doe 1 or Doe 2 (pg…
…The paper’s value to “those monitoring the federal courts” would be “negligible,” id., since the federal court would have exercised no judicial authority in connection with the paper. 3 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 996 Filed…
…wrongdoing. In any event, the excerpts mentioning Doe 107 do not accuse them of any wrongdoing at all. The Rule 26 disclosures only state that Doe 107 may have knowledge of the sex-trafficking scheme at issue in this case…
Comments