Epstein Secrets

ly compromising its ability to be impartial to the government and defendant, the only true parties to the trial of the indictment" United States v. Rubin, 558 F. Supp. 2d 411, 428 (E.D.N.Y. 2008). 4 EFTA00230133 1 .i i r- ate': , Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 58 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/07/2011

to provide information supporting whatever claim a victim may wish to assert in a motion for relief under section 3771(d)(3). In United States v. Rubin, 558 F.Supp.2d 411 (ED.N.Y. 2008), an alleged victim of a stock swindle claimed the right to confer in section 3771(aX5) included a right to obtain

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

n Dean has been cited in one very recent District Court decision, which provides further support for Petitioner's position here. In United States v. Rubin, 2008 WI. 2358591 (E.D.N.Y. 2008), the victims argued for extremely broad rights under the CVRA. After citing Dean, the District Court agreed that

we are also writing to ask for your non-opposition to Jane Doe No. 3 and Jane Doe No. 4's motion to intervene in the case. As you know, Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows intervention on two grounds: Mandatory intervention is allowed where a putative intervenor "claims an inter relating to the . . .

ly compromising its ability to be impartial to the government and defendant, the only true parties to the trial of the indictment." United States'. Rubin, 558 F. Supp. 2d 411, 428 (E.D.N.Y. 2008). 4 EFTA00177118 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 58 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/07/2011 Page 5 of 15 crim

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

t 361-63 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 19 of 1/1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Rubin where they discussed that very scenario stating there at least has to be criminal charges contemplate by the government before these rights kick i

e victims were not properly notified about event during that investigation. 59. RFP No. 25 requests all initial productions that are required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This is a protective request to ensure that, should it be determined that the Civil Rules apply, they then receive all materials to whic

lly compromising its ability to be impartial to the government and defendant, the only true parties to the trial of the indictment" United States'. Rubin, 558 F. Supp. 2d 411, 428 (E.D.N.Y. 2008). 4 08-80736-CV-MARRA 000887 EFTA00230711 1 .i i r- ate': , Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 58 Entere

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