Filed: Feb. 02, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 02, 2016
Summary: ORDER LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , District Judge . On October 29, 2013, during the trial of this matter, this Court entertained and DENIED an oral motion by the United States to seal portions of trial transcripts pertaining to a cooperating defendant-witness. RT 10/29/2013, 117:8-10. This Court instead ordered that witness's name be redacted from the trial transcripts. Id. On January 29, 2014, the Court reporter filed redacted transcripts in accordance with the Court's prior order. Doc. Nos. 25
Summary: ORDER LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , District Judge . On October 29, 2013, during the trial of this matter, this Court entertained and DENIED an oral motion by the United States to seal portions of trial transcripts pertaining to a cooperating defendant-witness. RT 10/29/2013, 117:8-10. This Court instead ordered that witness's name be redacted from the trial transcripts. Id. On January 29, 2014, the Court reporter filed redacted transcripts in accordance with the Court's prior order. Doc. Nos. 256..
More
ORDER
LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge.
On October 29, 2013, during the trial of this matter, this Court entertained and DENIED an oral motion by the United States to seal portions of trial transcripts pertaining to a cooperating defendant-witness. RT 10/29/2013, 117:8-10. This Court instead ordered that witness's name be redacted from the trial transcripts. Id. On January 29, 2014, the Court reporter filed redacted transcripts in accordance with the Court's prior order. Doc. Nos. 256, 257, 258. This matter is pending on appeal in the Ninth Circuit.
Before this Court, on January 28, 2016, the United States filed a letter "memorandum" inquiring "whether this Court takes the position that the redacted transcript complies with the Court's October 21, 2013 order." On January 29, 2016, defendant-appellant filed a responsive letter memorandum.
This court allows its prior Order to stand. The Trial transcripts from the proceedings on October 29, 30, and 31, 2013 were properly redacted by the court reporter pursuant to this Court's prior Order. Doc. Nos. 256, 257, 258. The United States has made no showing otherwise as required by Oregonian Publishing Co. v. U.S. District Court, 920 F.2d 1462, 1466 (9th Cir. 1990).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
