Epstein Secrets

public disclosure of the victims' identities in these cases, and allowed the Plaintiff in that case to "proceed in this action under the pseudonym 'Jane Doe' ", by Order dated October 6, 2008. 7. Jeffrey Epstein sets forth no facts to support his bare contention that Jane Does 2- 7 use of a pseudonym in

Page 9 of 15 assault. See, e.g., Aware Woman Ctr., 253 F.3d at 685 (abortion); EW, 213 F.R.D. at 111 (infection with hepatitis B); Doe. Evans, 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (E.D.Pa.2001) (sexual assault victim); Smith, 105 F.Supp.2d at 42 (sexual assault victim); WGAI Priority Pharmacy, Inc., 184 F.R.D. 616, 617 (

JOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-M.ARRA/JOHNSON EFTA00222236 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 141 Entered on FLSD Docket 06:,05!2009 Page 3 of 6 JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, Defendants. DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-JOHNSON Plaintiff, J

the following case as supplemental authority in connection with the above referenced Motions to Compel and Replies thereto: 1. Doe v. Evans, 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (ED. P.A. 2001) (denying protective order where alleged sexual assault victim did not demonstrate a serious specific injury and allowing Defen

HNSON Plaintiff, lb} FREY EPSTEIN Defendant. EFTA00222242 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 143 Entered on FLSD Docket 06,05/2009 Page 3 of 6 JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, Defendants. DOE II, CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-JOHNSON Plaintiff, J

the following case as supplemental authority in connection with the above referenced Motions to Compel and Replies thereto: 1. Doe v. Evans, 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (ED. P.A. 2001) (denying protective order where alleged sexual assault victim did not demonstrate a serious specific injury and allowing Defen

d on FLSD Docket 06/08/2009 Page 5 of 11 CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Background Defendant Epstein has filed a boilerplate motion to strike Jane Doe's trial date — and numerous other consolidated cases involving similar allegations of his sexual abuse of minors - for an unspecified period of time,

KAM Document 149 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/09/2009 Page 7 of 13 Doe 101 v. Epstein Page 7 must be shown with specificity. See Doe v. Evans, 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (E.D. P.A. 2001). Thus, Plaintiffs have not met their burden of persuasion. N. Plaintiffs fail to show good cause in that they have not clearl

public disclosure of the victims' identities in these cases, and allowed the Plaintiff in that case to "proceed in this action under the pseudonym 'Jane Doe' ", by Order dated October 6, 2008. 7. Jeffrey Epstein sets forth no facts to support his bare contention that Jane Does 2- 7 use of a pseudonym in

Page 9 of 15 assault. See, e.g., Aware Woman Cir., 253 F.3d at 685 (abortion); ■ 213 F.R.D. at III (infection with hepatitis B); Doe v. Evans, 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (E.D.Pa.200 I) (sexual assault victim); Smith, 105 F.Supp.2d at 42 (sexual assault victim); WGA v. Priority Pharmacy, Inc., 184 F.R.D. 616, 61

CT DATE(S) DEFENDANT(S) VICTIM(S) STATUTES/CHARGE 25 August 2003 - February 2004 Jane Doe #18 18 U.S.C. §§ 2422(b) and 2 Using a facility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, induce, or entice a person who had not att

the following case as supplemental authority in connection with the above referenced Motions to Compel and Replies thereto: 1. Doe v. Evans, 202 F.R.D. 173, 176 (E.D. P.A. 2001) (denying protective order where alleged sexual assault victim did not demonstrate a serious specific injury and allowing Defe