Epstein Secrets

tiff's MOTION Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's Motion for Order Directing the US. Attorney's Office Not to Withhold Relevant Evidence Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe & filed by United States of America. (Lee, Dexter) (Entered: 05/30/2011) 06/17/2011 85 Notice of Supplemental Authority re 48 Plaintiff's MOTION for

ed: 03/29/2012) 04/17/2012 L62 MOTION for Protective Order by Intervenors Black Weinberg and LeJkowitz and Opposition to Motions of Jane Doe I and Jane Doe 2 For Production, Use, and Disclosure of Settlement Negotiations by Roy Black. (Perczek, Jacqueline) (Entered: 04/17/2012) 04/17/2012 161 MOTION fo

2012 181 Notice of Supplemental Authority in support of Jane Doe #1 and Jan Doe #2's Response to Government's Sealed Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction by Jane Doe (Edwards, Bradley) Modified on 12/11/2012 (Is). (Entered: 12/10/2012) 12 21/2012 M RESPONSE in Opposition re M Motion to Expedite Rul

orney's Office for violating Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's rights; • A monetary sanction imposed against the U.S. Attorney's Office, to be paid to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 directly or to any other appropriate person or entity;; • An order establishing the precise rule regarding the timing of the obli

Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to respond to the Government's Sealed Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. The Court should deny the motion. Because the Government has filed a motion to dismiss alleging that the victims' pleadings are facially deficient

orney's Office for violating Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's rights; • A monetary sanction imposed against the U.S. Attorney's Office, to be paid to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 directly or to any other appropriate person or entity;; • An order establishing the precise rule regarding the timing of the obli

Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to respond to the Government's Sealed Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. The Court should deny the motion. Because the Government has filed a motion to dismiss alleging that the victims' pleadings are facially deficient

Appendix A EFTA00208790 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. MOTION TO SEAL The United States of America, by and through the undersigned Assistant United St

ing such information be filed under seal. EFTA00208791 WHEREFORE, the United States respectfully requests that the Motion to Dismiss for lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction be sealed. DATED: November 7, 2011 Respectfully submitted, WIFREDO A. FERRER The undersigned hereby certifies and affirms that a copy of the fore

tered on FLSD Docket 01/24/2012 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S REPLY TO PETITIONERS' RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S SEALED MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY PE

the Court should grant the United States' Motion to Stay Discovery pending the Court's decision on the United States' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and, similarly, deny the Petitioners' Protective Motion to Compel. In both their Response to the Motion to Stay Discovery and their Motion to Compel

tered on FLSD Docket 01/24/2012 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S REPLY TO PETITIONERS' RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S SEALED MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY PE

the Court should grant the United States' Motion to Stay Discovery pending the Court's decision on the United States' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and, similarly, deny the Petitioners' Protective Motion to Compel. In both their Response to the Motion to Stay Discovery and their Motion to Compel