Epstein Secrets

s factual findings for clear error, its legal determinations de novo, and its ultimate decision to seal or unseal for abuse of discretion."11 I I Bernstein v. Bernstein Dimwits Berger & Grossmann LLP, 814 F.3d 132, 139 (2c1Cir. 2016). B. The Summary Judgment Materials 121 131 I4IWith respect to the fi

moved to intervene, seeking to unseal three do l. that, he argues, demonstrate that invented the accusations against him. On January 19, 2017, Cernovich, an independent blogger and self-described "popular political journalist,"7 moved to intervene, seeking to unseal the summary judgment record, a

he-record findings that sealing is necessary to preserve higher values and only if the sealing order is narrowly tailored to achieve that aim."13 " Bernstein v. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, 814 F.3d 132, 139 (2d Cir. 2016). 12 Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 121 (2d Cir. 2

d, and Dershowitz joined his motion. On April 6, 2018, after the case had settled, the Herald moved to intervene and unseal , an' 7 Br. Appellant (Cernovich) 4. 8 EFTA00092315 the entire docket. The District Court granted each of these motions to intervene, but denied the related requests to unseal i

Granting Dershowitz Motion to Intervene); v. Maxwell, No. 15 Civ. 7433 (RWS), 2017 WL 1787934 (S.D.N.Y. May 3, 2017), ECF No. 892 (Opinion Granting Cernovich Motion to Intervene). 121 PIAlthough the case was closed by the Clerk of Court on May 25, 2017 pursuant to the settlement agreement, "intervention

4 See United States v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 863 F.3d 125 (2d Cir. 2017) (noting discovery documents lie beyond the presumption of public access); Bernstein v. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann UP, 814 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 2016) (weighing value of public disclosure of complaint against privacy interests