Epstein Secrets

With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his unde

eal, substantial and not remote possibility that Epstein may face criminal prosecution by the United State

intiff, Defendant. ______________ / Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply to Plaintiff's Response In Opposi

v. U.S., 24 Cl.Ct at 515-16; see also Wilson v. National Association of Letter Carriers, 2006 WL 3791313, *1 (E.D. La. 2006)(granting mo

2009 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA C.M. A., CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80811-MARRAIJOHNSON Plaintiff, r lEEEREIY EPSTEIN and■ Defendants, v. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply to Plaintiff's Response In Opposition To Defendant's Motion To Stay And/Or Continue Action

COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA C.M. A., CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80811-MARRAIJOHNSON Plaintiff, r lEEEREIY EPSTEIN and■ Defendants, v. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply to Plaintiff's Response In Opposition To Defendant's Motion To Stay And/Or Continue Action For Time Certain With Incorporated Memorandum Of La

EEEREIY EPSTEIN and■ Defendants, v. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply to Plaintiff's Response In Opposi

estigation will be closed is not immoderate or unreasonable. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company v. U.S„ 24 CI.Ct at 515-16; Ea to Wilson v, National Association of Letter Carriers, 2006 WL 3791313, *1 (E.D. La. 2006Xgranting motion to stay civil proceeding for 2 years and 7 months pending criminal investigation); Ostrow v, U.

CT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-CIV- 80893 — MARRA/JOHNSON Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Reply to Plaintiff's Response In Opposition To Defendant's Motion To Stay And/Or Continue Action For Time Certain With Incorporated Memorandum Of La

To Defendant's Motion To Stay And/Or Continue Action For Time Certain With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply to Plaintiffs Response In Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Stay Complaint (SI

N DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-CIV- 80893 —

gation will be closed is not immoderate or unreasonable. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company v. U.S., 24 CI.Ct at 515-16; see also Wilson v. National Association of Letter Carriers, 2006 WL 3791313, *1 (ED. La. 2006)(granting motion to stay civil proceeding for 2 years and 7 months pending criminal investigation). Here, Epstei