Back to Network
4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
4 / 4
Mentions
Document Mentions (4 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
e, the Government's lead argument in its response is that there was no "court proceeding" in this case that triggered Petitioner's right to confer. Gov't Response at 1-2. The Government's position flouts the plain language of the CVRA. The CVRA guarantees to Petitioner the right to confer with prosecutors "in
Government offers two explanations for sealing its pleadings. First, the Government clams that the pleading would reveal correspondence with minors. Gov't Motion at 1. But the Government has redacted the names of the minors involved (including Petitioner's name), so thee is no good basis for sealing. (Counse
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
e, the Government's lead argument in its response is that there was no "court proceeding" in this case that triggered Petitioner's right to confer. Gov't Response at 1-2. The Government's position flouts the plain language of the CVRA. The CVRA guarantees to Petitioner the right to confer with prosecutors "in
Government offers two explanations for sealing its pleadings. First, the Government clams that the pleading would reveal correspondence with minors. Gov't Motion at 1. But the Government has redacted the names of the minors involved (including Petitioner's name), so there is no good basis for sealing. (Couns
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
e, the Government's lead argument in its response is that there was no "court proceeding" in this case that triggered Petitioner's right to confer. Gov't Response at 1-2. The Government's position flouts the plain language of the CVRA. The CVRA guarantees to Petitioner the right to confer with prosecutors "in
Government offers two explanations for sealing its pleadings. First, the Government clams that the pleading would reveal correspondence with minors. Gov't Motion at 1. But the Government has redacted the names of the minors involved (including Petitioner's name), so there is no good basis for sealing. (Couns
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
e, the Government's lead argument in its response is that there was no "court proceeding" in this case that triggered Petitioner's right to confer. Gov't Response at 1-2. The Government's position flouts the plain language of the C'/RA. The CVRA guarantees to Petitioner the right to confer with prosecutors "in
overnment offers two explanations for sealing its pleadings. First, the Government claims that the pleading would reveal correspondence with minors. Gov't Motion at 1. But the Government has redacted the names of the minors involved (including Petitioner's name), so there is no good basis for sealing. (Couns
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (44)
Entities connected to both Gov't Response and Gov't Motion
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON12 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
Marc Rich
PERSON12 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
Bradley Edwards
PERSON12 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
Kenneth Marra
PERSON12 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
Bradley Cooper
PERSON12 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
GA
Garcia
PERSON12 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
RU
Rubin
PERSON12 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON12 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
the Southern District
LOCATION12 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
JD
Jane Doe
PERSON12 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
Criminal No
ORGANIZATION12 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
North America
LOCATION11 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
WA
Walker
PERSON10 w/ Gov't·4 w/ Gov't
George W. Bush
PERSON10 w/ Gov't·3 w/ Gov't
JG
Jack Goldberger
PERSON10 w/ Gov't·2 w/ Gov't
United States
LOCATION10 w/ Gov't·2 w/ Gov't
FBI
ORGANIZATION10 w/ Gov't·2 w/ Gov't
Palm Beach County
LOCATION10 w/ Gov't·2 w/ Gov't
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION10 w/ Gov't·2 w/ Gov't
CP
Craig v. People
PERSON8 w/ Gov't·3 w/ Gov't