Epstein Secrets

, liberty, or property interest implicated in the CVRA, and courts are hesitant to find that a substantive due process right has been created. See Collins v. City of Harker Heights, Texas 503 U.S. 1 15, 5 EFTA00208110 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 59 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/07/2011 Page 6 of 9

rs. III. PETITIONERS HAVE NO RIGHT TO DISCOVERY UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Petitioners argue they are entitled to discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but they point to no particular rule, or case, which provides that such a discovery rights exists. Instead, petitioners seize upon the g

omplaint that are central to the plaintiff's claim for relief. Causey v. Sewell Cadillac-Chevrolet, Inc., 394 F.3d 285, 288 (5th Cir. 2004) (citing Collins v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, 224 F.3d 496, 498-99 (5th Cir. 2000)). Also, the Court is permitted to consider matters of public record and other ma

ng that applying the Rule 12(6)(1) standard permits the Court to consider a broader range of materials in resolving the motion). 10 Rule 12(6)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a party to move for dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Such a motion is rarel

, liberty, or property interest implicated in the CVRA, and courts arc hesitant to find that a substantive due process right has been created. See Collins I. City of Harker Heights. Texas, 503 U.S. 115, 5 EFTA00177151 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 59 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/07/2011 Page 6 of 9

rs. III. PETITIONERS HAVE NO RIGHT TO DISCOVERY UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Petitioners argue they arc entitled to discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but they point to no particular rule, or case, which provides that such a discovery rights exists. Instead, petitioners seize upon the g

e, liberty, or property interest implicated in the CVRA, and courts are hesitant to find that a substantive due process right has been created. Site Collins v. City of Harker Heights. Texas, 503 U.S. 115, 125 (1992X"As a general matter, the Court has always been reluctant to expand the concept of substa

ell). Id. The Court then noted: "Because the Court will allow this limited factual development, it is unnecessary to decide here whether the CVRA or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide discovery rights in this context. The Court therefore reserves ruling on [the victims'] motion [for an order directing the Govern

, liberty, or property interest implicated in the CVRA, and courts are hesitant to find that a substantive due process right has been created. See Collins v. City of Harker FIeights. Texas, 503 U.S. 115, 5 EFTA00230168 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 59 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/07/2011 Page 6 of 9

itioners. PETITIONERS HAVE NO RIGHT TO DISCOVERY UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Petitioners argue they arc entitled to discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but they point to no particular rule, or case, which provides that such a discovery rights exists. Instead, petitioners seize upon the g

, liberty, or property interest implicated in the CVRA, and courts are hesitant to find that a substantive due process right has been created. See Collins City of Harker FIeights. Texas, 503 U.S. 115, 5 08-80736-CV-MARRA 000922 EFTA00230746 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 59 Entered on FLSD Docke

itioners. PETITIONERS HAVE NO RIGHT TO DISCOVERY UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Petitioners argue they arc entitled to discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but they point to no particular rule, or case, which provides that such a discovery rights exists. Instead, petitioners seize upon the g