5
Shared Docs
5
Same-Page
5 / 5
Mentions
n to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, explaining that this Court did not have jurisdiction to review the discovery order under Mohawk Industries I Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009). On July 12, 2013, Epstein responded in opposition to the motion to dismiss, and on July 16, 2013, the victim's replied in sup
Nos. 13-12923, 13-12926, 13-12928 IN THE alniteb 6tatel Court of appeato FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JANE DOE NO. 1 AND JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaints-Appellees UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee ROY BLACK ET AL., Intervenors-Appellants MOTION FOR EXPED
, that this Court lacks jurisdiction over such an interlocutory appeal in light of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Mohawk Industries, Inc.'. Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009) (attorney-client privilege ruling not immediately appealable; any injury can be addressed at conclusion of case) (Mot. Dismis
Nos. 13-12923, 13-12926, 13-12928 IN THE riiteb'tateg Court of appeabs FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JANE DOE NO. 1 AND JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiffs-Appellees UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee ROY BLACK ET AL., Intervenors-Appellants REPLY IN SUPP
motion to dismiss Epstein's interlocutory appeal, explaining that this Court lacked 6 EFTA00209513 jurisdiction in light of Mohawk Industries'. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009). On June 26, 2013, Epstein sought a stay of the district court pending appeal. DE 193. Two days later, the victims opposed the
Nos. 13-12923, 13-12926, 13-12928 IN THE Einiteb ibtateo Court of appeato FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JANE DOE NO. 1 AND JANE DOE NO. 2, 1. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ROY BLACK ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellees Defendant-Appellee Intervenors-Appellants OPPOSITIO
Appx. 286 (4th Cir. 2012), cert. denied, 133 S.Ct. 991 (2013) 55 *Missouri v. Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399 (2012) 12, 35,36 Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009) 46, 47, 48, 49, 51 EFTA00209664 Case: 13-12923 Date Filed: 08/05/2013 Page: 9 of 75 Moulder v. State, 154 Ind. App. 248,
Case: 13-12923 Date Filed: 08/05/2013 Page: 1 of 75 No. 13-12923 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JANE DOE NO. 1 AND JANE DOES NO. 2, Plaintiffs-Appellees v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee ROY BLACK ET AL., Intervenors/Appellants ON APPEA
Proceedings, 142 F.3d 1416, 1420 n. 9 (11th Cir.1998). EFTA00583882 Brief of Intervenors/Appellants at 45-52. Unlike Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), Epstein and the attorney intervenors intervened solely for the limited purpose of seeking to prevent the disclosure of confide
No. 13-12923 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JANE DOE NO. 1 AND JANE DOES NO. 2, Plaintiffs-Appellees v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee ROY BLACK ET AL., Intervenor/Appellants INTERVENO
Entities connected to both Carpenter and JANE DOE NO

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSONJane Doe
PERSON
Kenneth Marra
PERSON
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON
Bradley Edwards
PERSON
United States
LOCATION
Alan Dershowitz
PERSONJack Goldberger
PERSONLeon Black
PERSON
George W. Bush
PERSON
Julie K. Brown
PERSON
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSONMaria Farmer
PERSON
Paul Cassell
PERSON
Prince Andrew
PERSONthe Southern District
LOCATION
Virginia Giuffre
PERSON
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATIONMartin Weinberg
PERSON
Stephen Hawking
PERSON