Epstein Secrets

a 91 6 88 Gibbs, Emma gisiál:tiod Fiel d London 'MIMI) UK 0207-01377 (h) +44 7 10 815 55(p) Email: ernmadbbpykahotmail com 0207-352 ~wo" . Gibson, Caroline 43 Cantenyell r2 ndon SES, 20-703 5974 (h) 07-937 6044 (w) Gillfilan, Andrew Box 65014 kSIMTr" Gillford, Lord & Lady 12 AshcomiStr

an Dickenson, Debbie 240 S °pi Dickinson, Janice OOi 6wis Royer Dietrich Marc Antoine and Cath 51 Ave Montigne Paris 75008 00 331 4256 9672 Dietrich, Paul & Laura Pre rdoni Afrildian Ersseping .Markets. Cm 1141 Custis St. (haw) Alexandna VA 22308 °Rs; 891244.073sti? cr„,„:12dy0 netatinet(

’s contacts throughout the United States, while under the Fourteenth Amendment only the con- tacts with the forum state may be consid- ered.” Chew v. Dietrich, 143 F.3d 24, 28 n. 4 (2d Cir.1998). Here, personal jurisdic- tion under the New York long-arm statute requires minimum contacts with New York pursua

t, “even when the complaint is liberally con- strued, that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts which would entitle him to relief.” Id.; Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) requires that a complaint contain “a short and plain stat

efendant’s contacts throughout the United States, while under the Fourteenth Amendment only contacts with the forum state may be considered.” Chew v. Dietrich, 143 F.3d 24, 28 n. 4 (2d Cir.1998). Plaintiffs claim that Rule 4(k)’s minimum contacts requirement is satisfied because the Defendants have purpose

sues and to dispose of unmeritorious claims.” Swierkiewicz vy. Sorema, N.A., 534 U.S. 506, 512, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002) (citing Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47, 78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957), Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence & Coordination Unit, 507 U.S. 163, 168-69, 11