EFTA00792252Set 9
2019-03-2024p4,929w
N.D.N.Y.
May 8, 2013) 6
Nixon v. Warner Commc 'us, Inc., 435 U.S. 589 (1978) 4, 5, 6
Scott v. Graham ... remand proceedings for an expeditious
document-by-document review. See Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589,
599 (1978) (observing that decisions regarding the appropriateness of sealing
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00792252.pdf
EFTA00075477Set 9
2020-08-2074p15,469w
EFTA00075480
Case 20-2413, Document 40, 08/20/2020, 2913550, Page5 of 74
Nixon a Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589 (1978) passim
Nosik a Singe, 40 F.3d ... EFTA00075500
Case 20-2413, Document 40, 08/20/2020, 2913550, Page25 of 74
Nixon a Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978) (cleaned up), quoted in
Brown, 929 F.3d
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00075477.pdf
EFTA00075024Set 9
2006-10-2331p8,486w
Intl Tel. & Tel. Corp.,
594 F.2d 291 (2d Cir. 1979) 10
Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc.,
435 U.S. 589 (1978) 3
Prescient Acquisition Grp., Inc. v. MJ Public Trust ... rest of his natural life in a federal prison"); see also Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S.
589, 597-98 (1978) ("The interest necessary to support the issuance
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00075024.pdf
EFTA00088205Set 9
2020-08-246p2,973w
actively considering the
unsealing of "confidential" materials simultaneous with the criminal prosecution. Nixon v.
Warner Commc'ns, 435 U.S. 589 (1978), is the closest, yet even there, the U.S. Supreme
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00088205.pdf
EFTA00794214Set 9
13p2,857w
light of the relevant
facts and circumstances of the particular case," Nixon v. Warner Commc 'ns, Inc.,
435 U.S. 589, 599 (1978).
II. General objections to unsealing of summary judgment
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00794214.pdf
EFTA00075004Set 9
2020-06-1020p5,220w
libelous statements for press consumption." Brown, 929 F.3d at 51 (quoting Nixon v. Warner
Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978)). The Brown court held: "District courts should
exercise
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00075004.pdf
EFTA00080465Set 9
2021-02-265p1,514w
First Amendment
presumption of access. Id. at 146; see also Nixon v. Warner Commc 'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 602
(1978). The question, then, is whether the redaction and sealing
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00080465.pdf