Epstein Secrets

2002 1 COMPLAINT against JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, GHISLAINE MAXWELL, ABIGAIL WEXNER, LESLIE WEXNER ( Filing fee $ 150 receipt number 803892.), filed by NELSON SHANICS.(ti, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 2/13/2003 (1db, ). (Entered: 10/03/2002) 10/02/2002 Summons Issued as to JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, GHI

ie showing that minimum contacts warranting personal jurisdiction exist.FN3 Mellon Bank (East) PSFS Nat. Ass'n I. Farina, 960 F.2d 1217, 1223 (3d Cir.1992). FN3. The Court notes that although a Plaintiff need only make a prima facie showing of jurisdiction to defeat a motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(bX

mina- tion of probable cause. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we vacate the order of the district court and remand for EFTA00191818 U.S.' NELSON cite as 68 F 593 (9nd Cir. 1993) further findings and reconsideration in actor- justice to grant transfer. dance with the foregoing. § 6032. U

d 20, the district court held a probable cause hear- ing pursuant to United States tz All Assets of Statewide Auto Pads, Inc. 971 F2d 896, 906 (2d Cir.1992) and United States v. Monsanto, 924 F2d 1186, 1203 (2d Cir.1991). On May 30, 1995, the district court vacated the seizure warrant, finding that th

urn of allegedly privileged documents in its for- mer president's possession and suppression of those documents already produced in EFTA00177869 NELSON'. OREENSPOON coo as 103 P.R.D. 118 (1984) litigation could be treated as motion to intervene, even though moving papers did not explicitly seek l

oduct even more scrupu- lously protected" than fact work' product); National Union Fire Ins. Co. R. Murray Sheet Metal Co., 967 F.2d 980, 984 (4th Cir.1992) (opinion work product "absolutely immune" from discovery); In re Martin Marietta Corp., 856 F.2d 619, 625 (4th Cir.1988); In re John Doe, 662