Open mlissner opened 7 years ago
Here's a good example case:
court: vawd
docket_number: 7:10-cr-00054-SGW
Also of note: These seem to disproportionately affect sealed cases, which is an argument against focusing on them. In issue #709, more than half of the 60 instances of this that we encountered mentioned the word "seal" in the document description.
These are all examples:
scd, 3:13-cr-01020-JFA, United States v. Wright, 206077, 16316764100, 2
vawd, 7:10-cr-00054-SGW, United States v. Corbett, 78080, 19111442860, 5
wvsd, 2:12-cr-00119, United States v. Spinks, 90075, 20112417185, 3
cacd, 2:09-cr-00671-CAS, United States v. Burgos-Hernandez, 448882, 03118399633, 6
caed, 2:13-cr-00086-GEB, United States v. Wymer, 251538, 03316566834, 4
caed, 1:05-cr-00435-AWI, United States v. White, 142850, 0331477001, 4
cacd, 2:11-cr-00307-DMG, United States v. Trujillo, 498924, 031112090406, 7
ncwd, 3:06-cr-00151-FDW, United States v. Pileggi, 45634, 1351273066, 2
deb, 08-13141-KJC, Tribune Media Company, Reorganized Debtors, 115179, 042011846587, 10133
deb, 08-13141-KJC, Tribune Media Company, Reorganized Debtors, 115179, 042011840112, 10134
vawd, 7:10-cr-00054-SGW, United States v. Corbett, 78081, 19111442182, 5
wawd, 2:11-cr-00111-RSL, United States v. Pham, 174898, 19714136977, 10
tnmd, 3:12-cr-00137, United States v. Martin, 53599, 16912001529, 6
tnmd, 3:14-cr-00037, United States v. Zapien, 59033, 16912565797, 13
tnmd, 3:14-cr-00037, United States v. Zapien, 59034, 16912565686, 13
caeb, 13-29030, William Cheng and Janet Cheng, 528222, 032021621182, 783
caeb, 13-29030, William Cheng and Janet Cheng, 528222, 032021621188, 783
tnmd, 3:14-cr-00037, United States v. Zapien, 59034, 16912565651, 2
tnmd, 3:14-cr-00037, United States v. Zapien, 59035, 16912565819, 2
tnmd, 3:14-cr-00037, United States v. Zapien, 59034, 16912565663, 6
tnmd, 3:14-cr-00037, United States v. Zapien, 59035, 16912565831, 6
scd, 3:13-cr-01020-JFA, United States v. Wright, 206079, 16316763946, 2
scd, 3:13-cr-01020-JFA, United States v. Wright, 206076, 16316764152, 2
ncwd, 3:06-cr-00151-FDW, United States v. Pileggi, 45632, 1351690917, 2
ncwd, 3:05-cr-00400-FDW, United States v. Cummins, 46159, 1351263612, 2
ncwd, 3:07-cr-00119-FDW-DCK, United States v. Ligator, 49201, 1351383844, 4
ncwd, 3:07-cr-00119-FDW-DCK, United States v. Ligator, 49203, 1351383943, 4
azd, 2:12-cr-02066-SRB, United States v. Pineda-Bustos, 745657, 025110203528, 6
wawd, 2:14-cr-00059-RSL, United States v. Lundy, 199281, 19715680590, 8
mied, 2:10-cr-20403-NGE-MKM, United States v. Kilpatrick, 254557, 09715841089, 181
mied, 2:10-cr-20403-NGE-MKM, United States v. Kilpatrick, 254557, 09715840614, 180
mied, 2:10-cr-20403-NGE-MKM, United States v. Kilpatrick, 254557, 09715841178, 182
mied, 2:10-cr-20403-NGE-MKM, United States v. Kilpatrick, 254557, 09715844260, 184
mied, 2:10-cr-20403-NGE-MKM, United States v. Kilpatrick, 254557, 09715854253, 197
caed, 2:09-cr-00244-WBS, United States v. Alvarez Ramirez, 192934, 03313327185, 5
caed, 2:09-cr-00244-WBS, United States v. Alvarez Ramirez, 192936, 03313327163, 5
mied, 2:10-cr-20403-NGE-MKM, United States v. Kilpatrick, 254555, 09716335079, 305
ohsd, 3:15-cr-00128-TMR, United States v. Gray, 187869, 14315707948, 13
ohsd, 3:15-cr-00128-TMR, United States v. Gray, 187870, 14315707902, 13
ohsd, 3:15-cr-00127-TMR, United States v. Traum, 187856, 14315707535, 14
ncwd, 3:06-cr-00151-FDW-DCK, United States v. Pileggi, 45637, 1351272929, 2
ncwd, 3:06-cr-00151-FDW-DCK, United States v. Pileggi, 45628, 1351272604, 2
ncwd, 3:06-cr-00151-FDW-DCK, United States v. Pileggi, 45637, 1351690562, 5
ncwd, 3:06-cr-00151-FDW-DCK, United States v. Pileggi, 45637, 1351272567, 6
wvsd, 2:12-cr-00119, United States v. Spinks, 90076, 20112417171, 3
nyed, 1:11-cr-00623-DLI, United States v. Hasbajrami, 321830, 123110061572, 85
nyed, 1:11-cr-00623-DLI, United States v. Hasbajrami, 321830, 123111683201, 165
cacd, 2:08-cr-01011-VBF, United States v. Sarmiento, 424184, 03116507665, 5
cacd, 2:09-cr-00671-CAS, United States v. Burgos-Hernandez, 448884, 03118400294, 6
caed, 2:11-cr-00190-MCE, United States v. Ramirez, 223062, 03315844695, 6
caed, 2:14-cr-00276-JAM, United States v. Silva-Soto, 273495, 03317708909, 6
caed, 2:15-cr-00115-TLN, United States v. Khamkeuanekeo, 282130, 03318178476, 5
caed, 2:15-cr-00115-TLN, United States v. Khamkeuanekeo, 282130, 03318178491, 10
caed, 2:15-cr-00115-TLN, United States v. Khamkeuanekeo, 282130, 03318178496, 12
caed, 2:15-cr-00115-TLN, United States v. Khamkeuanekeo, 282133, 03318178304, 5
caed, 2:15-cr-00115-TLN, United States v. Khamkeuanekeo, 282135, 03318178214, 5
caed, 2:16-cr-00025-TLN, United States v. Velazquez, 290957, 03318660159, 7
vawd, 7:10-cr-00054-SGW, United States v. Corbett, 78081, 19111442560, 5
tnmd, 3:14-cr-00037, United States v. Zapien, 59032, 16912565740, 13
dcd, 1:13-cr-00253-RWR, United States v. CLASS, 161854, 04514688406, 76
These are pretty rare. I have a feeling the easiest thing to do here is to figure out how to identify these, and just ignore them.
I'm really not sure what to call these, but PACER has some function that allows multiple dockets to be combined into one. Or something:
When we run into these, there's a funny thing that happens. One "docket" can have a bunch of docket entries with the same number:
Which...we...of course...don't know how to handle.
This came up while resolving issue #709, so we may want to revisit that when we get this resolved. This is low priority though. It's quite the corner case.