Epstein Secrets

stoppel does not apply to them because the government has not established one of the elements of the three-part test examined in Tampa Bay Water v. HDR Engineering, Inc., 731 F.3d 1171 (11th Cir. 2013). D.E. 416 at 60. Specifically, petitioners contend the government has not demonstrated the second factor, that petit

pplied to bar their claims. The government's cross-motion for summary judgment should be granted. DATED: October 10, 2017 Respectfully submitted, BENJAMIN G. GREENBERG ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 29 EFTA00800036 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 427 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/10/2017 Page 30 of 32 By: s/ Dexte

he earlier or later court was misled; and (3) whether the inconsistent later position would unfairly prejudice the opposing party. Tampa Bay Water,. HDR Engineering, Inc., 731 F.3d 25 EFTA00211742 1171, 1182 (11th Cir. 2013) citing Robinson I. Tyson Foods. Inc., 595 F.3d 1269, 1273 (I I th Cir. 2010). In their st

gment based on the undisputed factual record that has since been developed in this case. 111 /// /// 30 EFTA00211747 Respectfully submitted, BENJAMIN G. GREENBERG ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: Attorneys for the Government CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on June 2, 2017, the foregoing Respo

stoppel does not apply to them because the government has not established one of the elements of the three-part test examined in Tampa Bay Water v. HDR Engineering, Inc., 731 F.3d 1171 (11th Cir. 2013). D.E. 416 at 60. Specifically, petitioners contend the government has not demonstrated the second factor, that petit

applied to bar their claims. The government's cross-motion for summary judgment should be granted. DATED: October 6, 2017 Respectfully submitted, BENJAMIN G. GREENBERG ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 29 EFTA00800004 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 425-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/06/2017 Page 31 of 33 By: s/ De