EFTA00028929_p3_i0.png Image dataset_8 View on DOJ

Illegal Activity
suspicious
Blackmail
possible
Date
2006-09-14
Document Type
image
Model
gemini-2.0-flash-001
Processed
2026-02-07T18:45
Summary
The image shows a scanned page from a legal document, specifically a Table of Authorities listing various legal cases and citations. Two instances of redaction are present, obscuring text before 'v. Maxwel' and 'v. Maxwell', which raises suspicion.
Metadata
Subject
Table of Authorities
Sender
Recipients
Document ID
Date
2006-09-14
Illegal Activity
Severity
suspicious
Description
The redactions before 'v. Maxwel' and 'v. Maxwell' are suspicious and warrant further investigation.
Blackmail Indicators
Likelihood
possible
Description
The redactions suggest that some information is being protected, which could potentially be used for leverage.
Public Knowledge
Context
Legal documents are often public record, but redactions indicate some information is being kept private.
Document Extraction
Document Type
legal_filing
Date
Sept. 14, 2006
Sender
Unknown
Reference #
No. 05 CIV. 8453 KMK JCF2006 WL 2664313929 F.3d 4154 F.R.D. 91166 F. Supp. 2d 805438 U.S. 154325 F. Supp. 3d 4282017 WL 1373918No. 16MC484(DLC)594 F.2d 291165 F. Supp. 2d 601731 F.3d 233630 F.2d 1207544 F.3d 110897 F.3d 36894 F.3d 782No. S1 03 CR. 987DAB2009 WL 1585776
Key Points:
  • Legal cases and their citations
Full Text Transcription:
Table of Authorities Cases Abdell v. City of New York, No. 05 CIV. 8453 KMK JCF, 2006 WL 2664313 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 14, 2006). 8 Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935) 24 Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) 11 v. Maxwel, 929 F.3d 4 (2d Cir. 2019) 19, 20 Chemical Bank v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co., 154 F.R.D. 91 (S.D.N.Υ. 1994). 14, 18, 19 Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206 (1960). 20 Four Star Fin. Servs., LLC v. Commonwealth Mgmt. Assocs., 166 F. Supp. 2d 805 (S.D.N.Y. 2001). 25 Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978). 20.22 v. Maxwell, 325 F. Supp. 3d 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) 8,15 Hampton v. United States, 425 U.S. 484 (1976). 20 In re WinNet R CJSC, 2017 WL 1373918 (S.D.N.Y. No. 16MC484(DLC), Apr. 13, 2017)....... 24 Martindell v. Int'l Tel. & Tel. Corp., 594 F.2d 291 (2d Cir. 1979) 18,21 McNabb v. United States, 318 U.S. 332 (1943). 20 Morales v. Portuondo, 165 F. Supp. 2d 601 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) 24 Rea v. United States, 350 U.S. 214 (1956) 20 United States v. Bout, 731 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 2013). 23 United States v. Cortina, 630 F.2d 1207 (7th Cir. 1980). 20, 22, 25, 26 United States v. Falso, 544 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2008) 22 United States v. Lambus, 897 F.3d 368 (2d Cir. 2018). 23,25 United States v. Ming He, 94 F.3d 782 (2d Cir. 1996) 20 United States v. Paredes-Cordova, No. S1 03 CR. 987DAB, 2009 WL 1585776 (S.D.N.Y. June 8, 2009) 25 ii
Image Classification
Category
document_scan
Subcategory
legal_filing
Quality
high
Redacted
Yes
Redaction
Two instances of redaction, black rectangles, are present before the text 'v. Maxwel' on the document.
Scene Analysis
Setting
indoor
Location Type
office
Identified Location
Atmosphere
formal
Time of Day
unclear
Season/Weather
unclear
Sensitivity Assessment
Level
low
Description
The document contains legal case information, which is generally considered public record, but redactions suggest some information is being protected.
Exploitation Risk
low
Full Image Description
The image is a scanned document page, specifically a 'Table of Authorities' listing legal cases. The document is in black and white and appears to be of high quality, with clear, readable text. The title 'Table of Authorities' is centered at the top, followed by the heading 'Cases'. Below, a list of legal cases is presented, each with its citation and a number on the right side of the page. There are two instances of redaction in the form of black rectangles, obscuring text before 'v. Maxwel' and 'v. Maxwell'. The bottom of the page contains the roman numeral 'ii'. The document appears to be a legal filing or a similar type of legal document.
Text in Image
Content
Table of AuthoritiesCasesAbdell v. City of New York, No. 05 CIV. 8453 KMK JCF, 2006 WL 2664313(S.D.N.Y. Sept. 14, 2006).8Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935)24Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)11v. Maxwel, 929 F.3d 4 (2d Cir. 2019)19, 20Chemical Bank v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co., 154 F.R.D. 91 (S.D.N.Υ. 1994).14, 18, 19Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206 (1960).20Four Star Fin. Servs., LLC v. Commonwealth Mgmt. Assocs., 166 F. Supp. 2d 805(S.D.N.Y. 2001).25Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978).20.22v. Maxwell, 325 F. Supp. 3d 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)8,15Hampton v. United States, 425 U.S. 484 (1976).20In re WinNet R CJSC, 2017 WL 1373918 (S.D.N.Y. No. 16MC484(DLC), Apr. 13, 2017)....... 24Martindell v. Int'l Tel. & Tel. Corp., 594 F.2d 291 (2d Cir. 1979)18,21McNabb v. United States, 318 U.S. 332 (1943).20Morales v. Portuondo, 165 F. Supp. 2d 601 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)24Rea v. United States, 350 U.S. 214 (1956)20United States v. Bout, 731 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 2013).23United States v. Cortina, 630 F.2d 1207 (7th Cir. 1980).20, 22, 25, 26United States v. Falso, 544 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2008)22United States v. Lambus, 897 F.3d 368 (2d Cir. 2018).23,25United States v. Ming He, 94 F.3d 782 (2d Cir. 1996)20United States v. Paredes-Cordova, No. S1 03 CR. 987DAB, 2009 WL 1585776(S.D.N.Y. June 8, 2009)25ii
Type
printedprintedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtypedtyped
Language
English
Significance
The text lists legal cases and citations, which is significant for legal research or understanding the context of a legal document.
Raw Analysis JSON click to expand
Themes
Legal matters/litigation
Organizations 5
City of New YorkAffiliated FM Ins. Co.Commonwealth Mgmt. Assocs.WinNet R CJSCInt'l Tel. & Tel. Corp.
Locations 3
New YorkMarylandDelaware
Financial Entities 1
Chemical Bank
File Info
File Name
EFTA00028929_p3_i0.png
Dataset
dataset_8
Type
Image
Model
gemini-2.0-flash-001
Processed
2026-02-07T18:45:06.563158
DOJ Source
View on DOJ