Full text
CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS Doc. 130 Filed 11/15/22 Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
United States of America, Case No. 22-cr-223 (NEB/TNL)
Plaintiff,
v. PROTECTIVE ORDER
GOVERNING DISCOVERY
Aimee Marie Bock et al.,
Defendants.
This matter comes before the Court on the Government’s Motion for Protective
Order Governing Discovery, ECF No. 123. The Government states that the disclosures
required by Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure in this case include highly
sensitive information, including tax records, bank and credit card records, and other
documents and records containing personal financial information and personal identifiable
information of parties and non-parties, including children. The Government further states
that “[w]hile [it] intends to redact a small subset of sensitive information from the
discovery, the redaction of all personal and sensitive information from the discovery would
be impractical and unduly burdensome.” ECF No. 123 at 3. Moreover, “[w]hile the
[G]overnment is prepared to make discovery available to defense counsel for inspection at
its offices, which would satisfy its disclosure obligations under the rules, this would be less
useful to the defense and impractical for both parties.” ECF No. 123 at 3-4. The
Government requests a protective order requiring that certain information be deemed
“Protected Material” and such Protected Material be held in confidence by Defendants and
CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS Doc. 130 Filed 11/15/22 Page 2 of 4
their counsel and used “solely for purposes of this litigation.” ECF No. 123 at 4. The
Court directed that any response to the Government’s motion be filed on or before
November 4, 2022. ECF No. 124.
Under Rule 16(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, “[a]t any time the
court may, for good cause, deny, restrict, or defer discovery or inspection, or grant other
appropriate relief.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(d)(1). The Court finds there has been good cause
shown as to why the dissemination of certain highly sensitive information should be
limited.
Based on the foregoing, and all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, and
pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(d), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Government’s
Motion for Protective Order Governing Discovery, ECF No. 123, is GRANTED IN PART
and DENIED IN PART as set forth herein. “Protected Material” as defined below shall
be held in strict confidentiality and used only in connection with the defense of the charges
in this case, and for no other purpose.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED:
1. “Protected Material” includes all information produced by the Government
in this case and all information produced by the Defendants in this case, except matters of
public record, the Defendants’ own statements, criminal history information, and expert
reports.
2. Protected Material shall be held in strict confidentiality by Defendants,
defense counsel, and the Government and may be used solely for purposes of this litigation
in United States v. Aimee Marie Bock et al., No. 22-cr-223 (NEB/TNL).
2
CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS Doc. 130 Filed 11/15/22 Page 3 of 4
3. Defense counsel and counsel for the Government shall limit the making of
copies of the Protected Material to those necessary to their activities as counsel to a party
in this action.
4. All individuals having access to Protected Materials, including the
Defendants and any expert witnesses retained by the Defendants and any expert witness or
agent of the Government, shall be informed of the terms of the Protective Order prior to
disclosure.
5. Use of the Protected Material covered by this Protective Order for any
purpose other than the instant litigation shall be deemed a violation of this Order subjecting
the violating party and the party’s counsel to sanctions.
6. Any filings with the Court that contain Protected Material shall first be
redacted pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 49.1 or, if not redacted, then filed under seal in
accordance with the Court’s sealing rules and applicable filing procedures.
7. Any documents or other materials containing Protected Material, and all
copies of them, must be destroyed or returned to the party that provided them within 60
days of the conclusion of this litigation, including appeals.
8. Nothing contained in this Order shall preclude any party from applying to
this Court for further relief or for modification of any provision hereof.
9. All prior consistent orders relating to the Indictment remain in full force and
effect.
3
CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS Doc. 130 Filed 11/15/22 Page 4 of 4
10. Failure to comply with any provision of this Order or any other prior
consistent Order shall subject the non-complying party, non-complying counsel and/or the
party such counsel represents to any and all appropriate remedies, sanctions and the like.
Dated: November 15 , 2022 s/ Tony N. Leung
Tony N. Leung
United States Magistrate Judge
District of Minnesota
United States v. Bock et al.
Case No. 22-cr-223 (NEB/TNL)
4