Epstein Secrets

retary's denial of benefit of foreign mission is controlling); see also Jones v. United States , 195 F.2d 707, 709 (9th Cir. 1952); United States v. Gardner , 903 F. Supp. 1394, 1402 (D. Nev. 1995), affd , 107 F.3d 1314 (9th Cir.), cert . denied , 118 S. Ct. 264 (1997); Osterlund , 505 F. Supp. at 167.

otion seeks an order of ejectment against the present respondents, who, as of this writing, have declined to execute the stipulation and order ( see Nakano Dec. ¶ 8 & n.2; Exh. G thereto). ARGUMENT THE PRESENT RESPONDENTS SHOULD BE EJECTED FROM THE PREMISES Under the Foreign Missions Act, "[t]he United States, acti

cretary's denial of benefit of foreign mission is controlling); see also Jones I. United States , 195 F.2d 707, 709 (9th Cir. 1952); United States 1 Gardner , 903 F. Supp. 1394, 1402 (D. Nev. 1995), affd , 107 F.3d 1314 (9th Cir.), cert . denied , 118 S. Ct. 264 (1997); Osterlund , 505 F. Supp. at 167.

otion seeks an order of ejectment against the present respondents, who, as of this writing, have declined to execute the stipulation and order ( see Nakano Dec. ¶ 8 & n.2; Exh. G thereto). ARGUMENT THE PRESENT RESPONDENTS SHOULD BE EJECTED FROM THE PREMISES Under the Foreign Missions Act, "[t]he United States, acti

cretary's denial of benefit of foreign mission is controlling); see also Jones v. United States, 195 F.2d 707, 709 (9th Cir. 1952); United States v. Gardner, 903 F. Supp. 1394, 1402 (D. Nev. 1995), affd, 107 F.3d 1314 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 264 (1997); Osterlund, 505 F. Supp. at 167. CONCL

otion seeks an order of ejectment against the present respondents, who, as of this writing, have declined to execute the stipulation and order (see Nakano Dec. ¶ 8 & n.2; Exh. G thereto). ARGUMENT THE PRESENT RESPONDENTS SHOULD BE EJECTED FROM THE PREMISES Under the Foreign Missions Act, "[t]he United States, act