Epstein Secrets

ter jurisdiction. See, e.g., In re Jacks, 642 F.3d 1323, 1332 (11th Cir. 2011); Reahard I. Lee County, 30 F.3d 1412, 1415 (11th Cir. 1994); see also Jacksonville Properly Rights Assn, Inc." City of Jacksonville, 635 F.3d 1266, 1276 (11th Cir. 2011), reh'g & reh'g en banc denied, Case No. 09-15629, 435 F. App

emedy because the status quo cannot be restored and because Petitioners have acted in a manner that has ratified the Non-Prosecution Agreement. See Mazzoni Farms, 761 So. 2d at 313 (concluding that "[a] prerequisite to rescission is placing the other party in status quo"); Renfrowl First Mortg. America, Inc.,

, 1332 (1 1 th Cir. 2011); Reahard v. Lee County, 30 F.3d 1412, 1415 (11th Cir. 1994); see also Jacksonville Property Rights Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville, 635 F.3d 1266, 1276 (11th Cir. 2011), reh'g & reh'g en banc denied, Case No. 09-15629, 435 F. App'x 914 (11th Cir. Jun. 29, 2011) (Table). I/I I/

emedy because the status quo cannot be restored and because Petitioners have acted in a manner that has ratified the Non-Prosecution Agreement. See Mazzoni Farms, 761 So. 2d at 313 (concluding that "[a] prerequisite to rescission is placing the other party in status quo"); Renfrow v. First Mortg. America, Inc

, 1332 (1 1 th Cir. 2011); Reahard v. Lee County, 30 F.3d 1412, 1415 (11th Cir. 1994); see also Jacksonville Property Rights Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville, 635 F.3d 1266, 1276 (11th Cir. 2011), reh'g & reh'g en banc denied, Case No. 09-15629, 435 F. App'x 914 (11th Cir. Jun. 29, 2011) (Table). I/I I/

emedy because the status quo cannot be restored and because Petitioners have acted in a manner that has ratified the Non-Prosecution Agreement. See Mazzoni Farms, 761 So. 2d at 313 (concluding that "[a] prerequisite to rescission is placing the other party in status quo"); Renfrow v. First Mortg. America, Inc

, 1332 (1 1 th Cir. 2011); Reahard v. Lee County, 30 F.3d 1412, 1415 (11th Cir. 1994); see also Jacksonville Property Rights Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville, 635 F.3d 1266, 1276 (11th Cir. 2011), reh'g & reh'g en banc denied, Case No. 09-15629, 435 F. App'x 914 (11th Cir. Jun. 29, 2011) (Table). 111 2i

emedy because the status quo cannot be restored and because Petitioners have acted in a manner that has ratified the Non-Prosecution Agreement. See Mazzoni Farms, 761 So. 2d at 313 (concluding that "[a] prerequisite to rescission is placing the other party in status quo"); Renfrow v. First Mortg. America, Inc

23, 1332 (11th Cir. 2011); Reahard v. Lee County, 30 F.3d 1412, 1415 (11th Cir. 1994); see also Jacksonville Property Rights Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville, 635 F.3d 1266, 1276 (11th Cir. 2011), reh'g & reh'g en banc denied, Case No. 09-15629, 435 F. App's 914 (11th Cir. Jun. 29, 2011) (Table). I/I //

emedy because the status quo cannot be restored and because Petitioners have acted in a manner that has ratified the Non-Prosecution Agreement. See Mazzoni Farms, 761 So. 2d at 313 (concluding that "[a] prerequisite to rescission is placing the other party in status quo"); Renfrow v. First Mortg. America, Inc