DOJ-OGR-00002498.jpg

be N Ww ws Oo OY ~] oO Ke) a oO = be N Ww fe ws Oo _ OY a ~] a oO a Ke) 20 21 22 28 24 25 IdasesT2O-cr-00330-AJN Document 136-9 Filed 02/04/21 Page 32 of 33 el the Court is not obliged to do the balancing test that the Court has so carefully done today and previously. The fact that someon there is going doesn't want to weigh in, the parties from the obligat and 11 tion of taking those steps, even if it is a burden. That's part THE COURT: Anything else, MS. WALSH: Christine Walsh behalf of the Miami Herald. We do agree with Ms. to be many reasons why a party t doesn't absolve the Court and of the process here, Judge. counsel? from Holland & Knight, on McCawley that the process seems to be duplicative with regards to the Does who are not responding that the Court will need to go back and revisit documents that are being rel ased piecemeal. And if there is not objections, those should be considered at one time. THE COURT: Anything else, MS. McCAWLEY: Yes, you to consider, with Ms. your Honor. counsel? One more option for Menninger raising the concern about people who we didn't get a return receipt from. We can also segregate out those for whom we did get a return receipt from, meaning they received it, did not object, so we would have we got the return receipt, and they that body. If that's a concern for the Court, we could narrow it at least somewhat. THE COURT: Anything else, Thank you. Some of of my mouth. F you hav counsel? taken the words right out SOUTHERN D STR CT RE PORT (212) 805-0300 ERS, P.C.** DOJ-OGR- 00002498