Page 1 of 2
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document189 Filed 03/29/21 Page1of2
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC #:
DATE FILED: 3/29/21
United States of America,
_y_
20-CR-330 (AJN)
Ghislaine Maxwell,
ORDER
Defendant.
ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:
The Court is in receipt of the Government’s letter responding to its March 18, 2021 order
regarding redactions to its omnibus memorandum of law in opposition to the Defendant’s twelve
pretrial motions. Dkt. No. 170.
As the Government now indicates, the information that the Defendant sought to redact on
pages 129-134 of the brief is already part of the public record in this case. S1 Superseding
Indictment, Dkt. No. 17, at 16-17. Once information has become part of the public record, any
interests that might have supported keeping it confidential largely dissipate. See United States v.
Nejad, No. 18-CR-224 (AJN), 2021 WL 681427, at *11 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 22, 2021); Cunningham
v. Cornell Univ., No. 16-CV-6525 (PKC), 2019 WL 10892081, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 2019).
In light of this fact and because the Court has been provided no further explanation for the
request to keep this redacted, the Court ORDERS that the information contained on pages 129-
134 of the Government’s brief be unredacted.
With respect to the proposed redactions to pages 118-119 and Exhibit 11, the Court now
understands that the parties seek redactions on the basis that the material has been maintained
under seal in Giuffre v. Maxwell, Case No. 15-cv-7433 (S.D.N.Y.). In light of the presumption
of access, however, the Court requires a separate justification, and must engage in its own
DOJ-OGR- 00002872