Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch4_p00614.png

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1328-41 Filed 01/05/24 Page 22 of 31 IAU Report did satisfy the judicial document inquiry, since the Report was passed between the parties in discovery, it lies entirely beyond the presumption's reach.”’). Given that the presumption of access here is weak, if it exists at all, Ms. Giuffre easily overcomes it with her countervailing evidence. With regard to her draft manuscript, it is protected under trade secret and copyright law, and Dershowitz has no legal right to disseminate it to a public audience.*” Courts routinely seal materials in support of filings when they contain proprietary or similarly protected content.*! Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. v. My Other Bag, Inc., 156 F.Supp.3d 425, 445 N7 (S.D.N.Y. 2016) (“As for competing considerations that counsel in favor of allowing the parties to file their briefs under seal, the privacy interests of the parties in preventing the public disclosure of private business figures and communications are not insignificant. The Court therefore concludes that the balance of interests is in favor of allowing the parties' briefs to be filed under seal.”). This decision is particularly instructive here, as it involved summary judgment filings, where the access presumption is highest, as opposed to the discovery brief exhibits at issue here, where the presumption is lowest. Finally, the privacy and sensitivity of the information here is particularly compelling in light of what Dershowitz intends to do if the Court allows him to disseminate these documents. His prior conduct reveals, without a shred of doubt, that he has a personal vendetta against Ms. Giuffre, and he will take these documents and attempt to publicly disparage Ms. Giuffre, as he has done in the recent past. The Second Circuit does not allow a court to unseal private and *° Ms. Giuffre has testified at her deposition in this case that her draft manuscript does not contain everything that happened to her. McCawley Dec. at Exhibit 13, Giuffre Dep. Tr. at 41. Tellingly, Dershowitz does not seek to lift the confidentiality of the testimony of all the witnesses in this case which reveals a significant sex trafficking ring. Instead, Dershowitz seeks to reveal evidence which he can spin in an attempt to legitimize his public relations campaign against her, while keeping secret the evidence that would directly refute his spin. 3! Similarly, with regard to the Churcher emails, those are the same “private business communications” that the court in Louis Vuitton found adequate to justify sealing the filings at issue. Indeed, the Second Circuit expressly recognizes such privacy rights as a legitimate basis to overcome the presumption of access. Amodeo II, 71 F.3d at 1051 (“Such interests, while not always fitting comfortably under the rubric ‘privacy,’ are a venerable common law exception to the presumption of access.”). 17