Epstein Secrets

ugh the review of potential or abstract disputes,' Digital Props., Inc. v. City of Plantation, 121 F.3d 586, 589 (11th Cir.1997)." United States v. Rivera, 613 F.3d 1046, 1050 (11th Cir. 2010); see also Pittman v. Cole, 267 F.3d 1269, 1278 (11th Cir. 2001) ("The ripeness doctrine prevent[s] the courts

onduct. 5 EFTA00100342 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 205-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/05/2013 Page 7 of 20 would redress claimed injury). II. The Claims Raised in the Petition Are Not Constitutionally Ripe, and These Proceedings Must Thus Be Dismissed for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. This Court mus

h the review of potential or abstract disputes,' Digital Props., Inc. v. City of Plantation, 121 F.3d 586, 589 (I I th Cir.1997)." United States v. Rivera, 613 F.3d 1046, 1050 (11th Cir. 2010); see also Pittman v. Cole, 267 F.3d 1269, 1278 (I I th Cir. 2001) ("The ripeness doctrine prevent[s] the cour

ot suffered a concrete injury that is fairly traceable to the challenged government conduct. 5 EFTA00208799 would redress claimed injury). II. The Claims Raised in the Petition Are Not Constitutionally Ripe, and These Proceedings Must Thus Be Dismissed for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. This Court mus

ugh the review of potential or abstract disputes,' Digital Props., Inc. v. City of Plantation, 121 F.3d 586, 589 (11th Cir.1997)." United States v. Rivera, 613 F.3d 1046, 1050 (11th Cir. 2010); see also Pittman v. Cole, 267 F.3d 1269, 1278 (11th Cir. 2001) ("The ripeness doctrine prevent[s] the courts

EFTA00076104 Case 9:08-c 3E-194M-0Otailitletil affoeurEenieiffea off ired3317O.0ftet (/46/201315Page 7 of 20 would redress claimed injury). II. The Claims Raised in the Petition Are Not Constitutionally Ripe, and These Proceedings Must Thus Be Dismissed for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. This Court mus

ugh the review of potential or abstract disputes,' Digital Props., Inc. v. City of Plantation, 121 F.3d 586, 589 (11th Cir.1997)." United States v. Rivera, 613 F.3d 1046, 1050 (11th Cir. 2010); see also Pittman v. Cole, 267 F.3d 1269, 1278 (11th Cir. 2001) ("The ripeness doctrine prevent[s] the courts

EFTA00095907 Case 9:08-c 3E-194M-0Otailitletil affoeurEenieiffea off ired3317O.0ftet (/46/201315Page 7 of 20 would redress claimed injury). II. The Claims Raised in the Petition Are Not Constitutionally Ripe, and These Proceedings Must Thus Be Dismissed for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. This Court mus