Epstein Secrets

, Defendants-Appellees. Docket No. 95-7925 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 91 F.3d 385; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 19807; 35 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 1352 April 19, 1996, Argued August 7, 1996, Decided For internal use only SDNY_GM_00057306 CONFIDENTIAL — PURSUANT TO FED. R.CO

direction for the entry of judgment." "Strict adherence to the certification requirements of Rule 54(b) has been our consistent view." In re Martin- Trigona, 763 F.2d 135, 139 (2d Cir. 1985). The district court's August 17th order did not dispose of all the Plaintiffs' claims against each of the Defendan

Page 7 91 F.3d 385, *; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 19807, **; 35 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 1352 engaging in schemes that were nearly identical to the schemes that the Defendants used to defraud the Plaintiffs. These claim

direction for the entry of judgment." "Strict adherence to the certification requirements of Rule 54(b) has been our consistent view." In re Martin- Trigona, 763 F.2d 135, 139 (2d Cir. 1985). The district court's August 17th order did not dispose of all the Plaintiffs' claims against each of the Defendan

Page 8 91 F.3d 385, *; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 19807, **; 35 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 1352 Because the August 17th order did not dispose of all claims against all parties and because there was no Rule 54(b) certificat

d not resolve all the claims in the action was interlocutory and was not appealable because there was no Rule 54(b) certification); see also Martin- Trigona, 763 F.2d at 139 (dismissing appeal for lack of jurisdiction where the defendant appealed from an order disposing of only a portion of the case and