can imagine the police affixing GPS tracking devices to thousands of cars at random, recovering the devices, and using digital search techniques to identify suspicious driving patterns.”). That is not at issue here. Rather, the Government seeks to retrieve phone numbers used during a particular time period in a particular area to be cross-referenced with data generated from other areas relevant to the investigation duritig other relevant time periods.” There is no possibility that widespread tracking of the locations of individuals could ensue if the application is granted. See In re Application of the United States of America for an Order Authorizing the Release of Historical Cell-Site Information, 809 F.Supp.2d 113, 122, 126-27 (E.D.N.Y.2011) (hereinafter In re E.D.N.Y. Application) (<HOLDING>); cf. Commonwealth v. Augustine, 467 Mass. 230,
holding that cumulative cellsite  location records require a warrant because of the significant governmental intrusion into information which is objectively recognized as highly private  that is the governments surveillance of ones movements over a considerable time period holding that fourth amendment protection extends to cellsite location records holding that records in the possession of a party with whom an agency has contracted to perform a governmental function on behalf of the agency are presumptively public records subject to public access so long as the record a directly relates to the governmental function and b is not exempt under the rtkl holding that payroll records of a private roofing contractor in the custody of a local agency were public records because they evidenced a disbursement by a governmental unit recognizing that intent of public records act is to provide all citizens with access to the records of all public governmental bodies