Epstein Secrets

y and decided without an evidentiary hearing, Plaintiffs need only make a prima facie showing that personal jurisdiction ex- ists. PDK Labs, Inc. a Friedlander, 103 F.3d 1105, 1108 (2d Cir.1997); AL Trade Finance, Ina a Petra Bank, 989 F.2d 76, 79 (2c1 Cir.1993). Plaintiffs may rely en- tirely on factual

WU v. Potter, 343 F.3d 619, 627 (2d Cir.2003) (noting a court may "devistel the procedures [to] ferret out the facts pertinent to jurisdiction"); Marine Midland Bank, N.A. v. Miller, 664 F.2d 899, 904 (2d Cir.1981) (noting a court has considerable procedural leeway in de- ciding whether discovery would assist re

rium) ("Prior to discovery, a plaintiff may defeat a motion to dismiss based on legally sufficient allegations of jurisdiction;") PDX Labs, Inc. v. Friedlander, 103 F.3d 1105, 1108 (2d Cir. 1997); Rubinbaum LLP v. Related corporate Partners V, L.P., 154 F. Supp. 2d 481, 486 (S.D.N.Y. 2001). The Court must

e of the evidence, either at trial or at a pretrial evidentiary hearing. See CutCo Industries, Inc. v. Naughton, 806 F.2d 361, 365 (2d Cir. 1986); Marine Midland Bank, N.A. v. Miller, 664 F.2d 889, 904 (2d Cir. 1981). But at this stage, prior to discovery, the Court must "credit a plaintiff's averments of jurisdi

ry and decided without an evidentiary hearing, Plaintiffs need only make a prima facie showing that personal jurisdiction ex- ists. PDK Labs, Inc. v. Friedlander, 103 F.8d 1105, 1108 @d Cir.1997); AZ. Trade Finance, Inc. v. Petra Bank, 989 F.2d 76, 79 (2d Cir.1993). Plaintiffs may rely en- tirely on factual al

, APWU v. Potter, 348 F.3d 619, 627 (2d Cir.2003) (noting a court may “devis[e] the procedures [to] ferret out the facts pertinent to jurisdiction”); Marine Midland Bank, N.A. v. Miller, 664 F.2d 899, 904 (2d Cir.1981) (noting a court has considerable procedural leeway in de- ciding whether discovery would assist res-