Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings United States v. Gregory J. Blotnick — D.N.J., Newark, Mag. No. 21-15165 (2:21-mj-15165-ESK) TELE/VIDEOCONFERENCING ORDER as to GREGORY J. BLOTNICK — USA v. BLOTNICK (Dkt. 8)

Court filing

TELE/VIDEOCONFERENCING ORDER as to GREGORY J. BLOTNICK — USA v. BLOTNICK (Dkt. 8)

Summary

An Order Regarding Use of Video Conferencing/Teleconferencing filed May 18, 2021 as Document 8 (Dkt. 8, PageID 23) in United States v. Gregory J. Blotnick, 21-11080 (Case 2:21-mj-15165-ESK), in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, signed by United States Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer. In accordance with Standing Order 2020-06, the order lists a finding that the Defendant consented after consultation with counsel and the choices of video teleconferencing or teleconferencing for that day's proceedings, and it carries two check marks and the date 5/18/2021.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
Filed2021-05-18

Cite this document

“TELE/VIDEOCONFERENCING ORDER as to GREGORY J. BLOTNICK — USA v. BLOTNICK (Dkt. 8).” U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, No. 2:21-mj-15165-ESK, Doc. 8, filed 2021-05-18. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/full-docket-gregory-j-blotnick-njd-472444/2021-05-18-gov-uscourts-njd-472444-8-0-doc-8/, SHA-256 d6f54fde07fe4cd9a9b59c8a40da82ec8250e183fcff581bde660cfb1d5eaed5.

Search CourtListener for this docket number

Full text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
UNITED STATES
*
*
v.
*
C$6(NO.
*
*
*
*****
ORDER REGARDING USE OF VIDEO CONFERENCING/TELECONFERENCING
In accordance with Standing Order 2020-06, this Court finds: 
That the Defendant (or the Juvenile) has consented to the use of video 
teleconferencing/teleconferencing to conduct the proceeding(s) held today, after consultation 
with counsel; and
The proceeding(s) held on this date may be conducted by: 
Video Teleconferencing
Teleconferencing, because video teleconferencing is not reasonably available for the 
following reason: 
The Defendant (or the Juvenile) is detained at a facility lacking video 
teleconferencing capability.
Other:
Date:
United States Magistrate Judge
GREGORY J. BLOTNICK
21-11080
✔
✔
Honorable Michael A. Hammer 
5/18/2021
s/Michael A. Hammer
Case 2:21-mj-15165-ESK   Document 8   Filed 05/18/21   Page 1 of 1 PageID: 23

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.njd.472444.8.0.pdf
Size
120,594 bytes
SHA-256
d6f54fde07fe4cd9a9b59c8a40da82ec8250e183fcff581bde660cfb1d5eaed5
Our copy
gov.uscourts.njd.472444.8.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top