Epstein Secrets

2 (2d Cir. 1994) Press-Enter. Co. a Superior Ct., 464 U.S. 501 (1984) S.E.C. v. TheStreet.Com, 273 F.3d 222 (2d Cir. 2001) passim 34 37 passim Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart, 467 U.S. 20 (1984) 24 State a Cady, 414 P.3d 974 (Utah Ct. App. 2018) 19 United States v. Amodeo, 44 F.3d 141 (2d Cir. 1995) ("Amod

ed in full because there are no -- there is no material within the caveat in the document. 165-3. Exhibit C. This is a copy of a motion to join in Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 files in court. That document is SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00075533 Case 20-2413, Document40,08/20/202

ation in opposition. That 11 can be unsealed in full because there is no material included 12 in the caveats in the document. 13 185-2. Copy of Jane Doe's no. 3 and 4 corrected 14 joinder motion. Already filed in public. 15 185-3. Response to the motion to intervene. Already 16 filed in public. 1

( emphasis added), common-law right of access does not extend to information collected through discovery which is not a matter of public record. See Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart, 467 U.S. 20, 33,104 S.Ct. 2199, 2207, 81 L.Ed.2d 17 (1984); Anderson, 799 F.2d at 1441; United States v. Gurney. 558 F.2d 1202, 1209

efender's office, Dave Brannon, Esq .. At or around that same time, Counsel for Jane Does 2-8 provided a copy of the book or journal to counsel for Jane Doe, Mr. Bradley Edwards. Upon learning of Jane Does 2-8's counsel and Jane Doe's counsel coming into possession of the journal or book in the face of

could be damaging to reputation and privacy. The government clearly has a substantial interest in preventing this sort of abuse of its processes. Seattle Times Co. Rhinehard, 467 U.S. 20, 35 (1984). The Eleventh Circuit has "repeatedly acknowledged the private nature of discovery" and that "[a] court may rest

295 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2015 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs, 1. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : Defendant. LIMITED INTERVENOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO ORDER REQUESTING JUSTIFI

could be damaging to reputation and privacy. The government clearly has a substantial interest in preventing this sort of abuse of its processes. Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehard, 467 U.S. 20, 35 (1984). The Eleventh Circuit has "repeatedly acknowledged the private nature of discovery" and that "[a] court may re

295 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2015 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : Defendant. LIMITED INTERVENOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO ORDER REQUESTING JUSTIFI

out its contents." Tillman v. C.R. Bard, Inc., Case No. 3:13-cv-222-J-34JBT (M.D. Fla. March 13, 2014), 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41406, at *6, quoting Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart, 467 U.S. 20, 31 (1984) Placing limitations on the dissemination and use of pretrial discovery is particularly important since "[t]he

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant, ROY BLACK, et al., Intervenors. INTERVENORS' MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE CONFIDENTIALITY

te 5 EFTA00606592 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 326 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2015 Page 6 of 16 and what degree of protection is required." Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart, 467 U.S. 20, 35 (1984) (discussing Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)); see also F.T.C. v. AbbVie Prods. LW, 713 F.3d 54, 58 (11th Cir. 2013) (not

M Document 326 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2015 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.:08-CV-80736-ICAM JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ORDER DENYING INTERVENOR'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER This cause is b

te 5 EFTA00674420 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 326 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2015 Page 6 of 16 and what degree of protection is required." Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart, 467 U.S. 20, 35 (1984) (discussing Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)); see also F.T.C. v. AbbVie Prods. LW, 713 F.3d 54, 58 (11th Cir. 2013) (not

M Document 326 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2015 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.:08-CV-80736-ICAM JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ORDER DENYING INTERVENOR'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER This cause is b

could be damaging to reputation and privacy. The government clearly has a substantial interest in preventing this sort of abuse of its processes. Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehard, 467 U.S. 20, 35 (1984). The Eleventh Circuit has Arepeatedly acknowledged the private nature of discovery@ and that A[a] court may re

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARFtA/JOHNSON JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. LIMITED INTERVENOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN=S RESPONSE To ORDER REQUESTING JUSTIFICA