DOJ-OGR-00002872.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document189 Filed 03/29/21 Pagelof2 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK poc#s DATE FILED: 3/29/21 sf] 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