Page 1 of 2
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 205 _ Filed 04/16/21 Pagelof2
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #:
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: 4/16/21
United States of America,
_y_
20-CR-330 (AJN)
Ghislaine Maxwell,
ORDER
Defendant.
ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:
On March 15, 2021, the Defendant filed under seal her reply briefs to the Government
memorandum of law opposing Defendants’ twelve pre-trial motions. She filed the briefs, along
with the corresponding exhibits, temporarily under seal in order to permit the Government and
the Court to review certain proposed redactions. Of the twelve reply briefs, Reply Briefs 2, 4, 7,
8, 9, 11, and 12 did not contain any redaction or sealing requests. Reply Briefs 1, 3, 5, 6, and 10
contain limited proposed redactions. Reply Briefs 3, 6, and 10 also contain exhibits that the
Defendant proposes be filed under seal.
As set forth in the Defendant’s cover letter, the premise of the proposed redactions is that
the materials were produced in discovery and subject to the protective order that has been
entered in this case. The mere existence of a confidentiality agreement or a protective order
covering judicial documents is insufficient to overcome the presumption of access. See Aioi
Nissay Dowa Ins. Co. v. Prosight Specialty Mgmt. Co., Inc., 12-cv-3274 (JPO), 2012 WL
3583176, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 21, 2012). And the Court did not receive specific requests or
justifications to redact or seal any of the materials.
DOJ-OGR-00003651