P. 1
MIT response to modifying protective order

MIT response to modifying protective order

|Views: 5|Likes:
Published by C Furman
MIT response to modifying protective order
MIT response to modifying protective order

More info:

Published by: C Furman on Mar 30, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/14/2014

pdf

text

original

Case 1:11-cr-10260-NMG Document 113 Filed 03/29/13 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. AARON SWARTZ, Defendant. ) ) ) ) Case No. 11-10260-NMG ) ) ) ) ) )

THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY’S MOTION TO INTERVENE AND PARTIALLY OPPOSE MOTION TO MODIFY PROTECTIVE ORDER Third party, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”), respectfully moves to intervene in this action for the limited purpose of partially opposing the Estate of Aaron Swartz’s Motion to Modify the Protective Order. MIT agrees to a modification of the Protective Order so long as it is conditioned on MIT being allowed, prior to any dissemination of documents, to redact the documents to protect the privacy and safety of members of the MIT community and to protect against the disclosure of any MIT network vulnerabilities. Specifically, MIT seeks an order compelling defense counsel to return all documents that it received during discovery, and any copies made of those documents, to the U.S. Attorney’s Office so that, prior to any public disclosure of these documents, MIT has the opportunity to redact (a) any names or identifying information, including titles and departments, of any MIT staff or other community member, and (b) any references to MIT network vulnerabilities. Counsel for both the United States of America and the Estate of Aaron Swartz have assented to MIT’s request to intervene in this action for the limited purpose of partially opposing the Motion to Modify the Protective Order.

Case 1:11-cr-10260-NMG Document 113 Filed 03/29/13 Page 2 of 3

In support of this motion and partial opposition, MIT files a supporting memorandum and affidavit, which MIT incorporates fully herein.

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY By its attorneys, /s/ Jonathan L. Kotlier____________ Jonathan L. Kotlier (BBO# 545491) jkotlier@nutter.com Christopher H. Lindstrom (BBO# 657430) clindstrom@nutter.com Emily J. Grannon (BBO# 682267) egrannon@nutter.com Nutter, McClennen & Fish, LLP Seaport West, 155 Seaport Blvd. Boston, Massachusetts 02210 Telephone: (617) 439-2000 Facsimile: (617) 310-9000

Dated: March 29, 2013

LOCAL RULES 7.1 & 112.1 CERTIFICATE Pursuant to Local Rules 7.1(A)(2) & 112.1, I hereby certify that counsel for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”) has conferred with counsel for the United States of America and the Estate of Aaron Swartz on the subject of this motion to in good faith resolve or narrow the issues. Counsel for both the United States of America and Aaron Swartz have assented to MIT’s request to intervene in this action. /s/ Jonathan L. Kotlier

2

Case 1:11-cr-10260-NMG Document 113 Filed 03/29/13 Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that, on March 29, 2013, this document (filed through the ECF system) will be sent electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as non-registered participants. /s/ Jonathan L. Kotlier

2184172.2

3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->