Giuffre v. Maxwell, No. 115-cv-07433 (S.D.N.Y. 2015)/988.pdf

Sigrid McCawley Telephone: (954) 356-0011 Email: smccawley@bsfllp.com September 20, 2019 VIA ECF The Honorable Judge Loretta A. Preska District Court Judge United States District Court 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Re: Giuffre v. Maxwell, Case No. 15-cv-07433-LAP Dear Judge Preska: Plaintiff submits this response to Defendant’s September 18, 2019, letter (Dkt. 987) in order to correct the record concerning Judge Sweet’s handling of deposition materials that were designated for use at trial. Defendant acknowledges that Plaintiff’s counsel provided the Court with “more than a dozen boxes of material, presumably all of the deposition transcripts,” but then speculates that the transcripts were “unread” and asserts that “[t]he parties do not know whether Judge Sweet ever reviewed any of the deposition designations, counter-designations, or objections.” Id. at 3. Contrary to Defendant’s suggestion, Judge Sweet actively reviewed the materials submitted. See Dkt. 903 (Apr. 5, 2017, Tr.) at 31 (Court noting it had “two and a half feet of depositions to review with objections”); Ex. A (correspondence between Chambers and Plaintiff’s counsel stating: “I just want to make sure that there is nothing MISSING from the Binder that the Judge needs to rule on”). The Court’s review of these materials makes clear that these are judicial documents. In addition, the fact that Court reviewed the transcripts, designations, counter- designations, and objections at the same time weighs in favor of grouping these materials in the same category. Ex. A at 1-3. The fact that there is not a separate docket entry for the initial trial deposition designations and instead the Court had the depositions delivered to chambers does not mean that they are not part of the record to be considered for unsealing. The trial deposition designations are clearly part of the court record, as were the objections and the testimony of the counter-designations which have docket entry numbers, were considered by the Court and are subject to the same unsealing review process as other documents in the court record. Sincerely, /s/ Sigrid McCawley Sigrid S. McCawley, Esq. Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 988 Filed 09/20/19 Page 1 of 1 BSF BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP 401 East Las O las Boulevard, Suite 1200. Fo r t Lauderdale . FL 33301 1 (t) 9S4 356 0011 I (f) 954 3 5 6 0022 I www.bsfllp.com