In Re: Associated Press

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• opining that “until admitted into the record, potential evidence is not ordinarily within the scope of the press access.”
• explaining that a failed intervenor “has no standing to appeal any order other than the denial of intervention”
• remanding case so that district court could articulate its justification for continued sealing of certain documents
• approving 22 motion to intervene as an “appropriate procedural mechanism” to 23 assert right of access
• requiring a “reasonable expectation that the same complaining party would be subjected to the same action again”
• requiring a “reasonable expectation that the same com- plaining party would be subjected to the same action again”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).