Epstein Secrets

t to add her as a party." DE 290 at 8. This unsupported allegation is simply false. See Aff. of Jane Doe No. 3 at 7, Exhibit 1 to Victims' Reply in Support of Motion for Joinder (hereinafter "Jane Doe No. 3 Aft") (responding to Government's claim of legal representation and attesting "[t]his is completely untrue, and I think

ion back in terms of lost evidence due to the passage of time or inadequate time for discovery. See Otto v. Milwaukee Cnty., 2007 WL 3228118, at *2 (E.D. Wis. 2007) (no evidence of prejudice; additional plaintiffs allowed). In fact, some jurisdictions require the opposing party to bear the burden of proving pr

t to add her as a party." DE 290 at 8. This unsupported allegation is simply false. See Aff. of Jane Doe No. 3 at 7, Exhibit 1 to Victims' Reply in Support of Motion for Joinder (hereinafter "Jane Doe No. 3 Aff.") (responding to Government's claim of legal representation and attesting "Mills is completely untrue, and I think

ion back in terms of lost evidence due to the passage of time or inadequate time for discovery. See Otto v. Milwaukee Cnty., 2007 WL 3228118, at *2 (E.D. Wis. 2007) (no evidence of prejudice; additional plaintiffs allowed). In fact, some jurisdictions require the opposing party to bear the burden of proving pr

t to add her as a party." DE 290 at 8. This unsupported allegation is simply false. See Aff. of Jane Doe No. 3 at 7, Exhibit I to Victims' Reply in Support of Motion for Joinder (hereinafter "Jane Doe No. 3 Aff.") (responding to Government's claim of legal representation and attesting "[t]his is completely untrue, and I thin

ion back in terms of lost evidence due to the passage of time or inadequate time for discovery. See Oslo I. Milwaukee Cnty.. 2007 WL 3228118. at *2 (E.D. Wis. 2007) (no evidence of prejudice; additional plaintiffs allowed). In fact, some jurisdictions require the opposing party to bear the burden of proving pr