Epstein Secrets

TION BY MSCO VS 700 01-24-02 COMMISSION 49.0D ROSS STORES INC ExECUMN BY MONT VS 400 01-08-02 SEC

INT CR 102.05152 FEB 02 ° 41 98 TOTAL SYMBOUCUSIP 0J.Wmv WI 044 sten .1.1.1XPrt Cn0r1 &VOW EFTA01322529 CLEARED 270000, ITS 20.011.1. Owe, Sutton? rn IJ V.2 IJ C) 0 ii C rn r 6TS£SEOCIN9- ANGS BEAR SIMMS CCM SERVICING ‘130R ACCOUNT 8e44. Steams & Co. Inc. 383 Made/on Avenue New

automatically include the report of the P right to be represented by counsel, n adequate representation, to have 1 be afforded an opportunity to ross-examine witnesses who appear at tion by proffer or otherwise. idence typically consists of the overnment's sole or principal witness), AUSA. The

play the concept our Court of Appeals applied to the Ex Post Facto r Clause (albeit in a different con t from the present one) in United States Sutton, 521 F.2d 1385, 1390- (7th ir.1975) (quoting United States Karnes, 437 F.2d 284, 289-90 (9th Cir. , cert. denied,402 U.S. 1008, 91 S.Ct. 2189,

ct Court for the Dis- trict of South Carolina, G. Ross Anderson, Jr., J., certified class, and lender a

R, 2d SERIES 1926, 48 LEd.2d 450 (1976) (Simon); Worth o. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 511, 95 S.Ct. 2197, 2211, 45 LEd.2d 843 (1976) (Worth ); NAACP v. Sutton, 371 U.S. 416, 428, 83 S.Ct. 828, 335, 9 L.Ed.2d 405 (1963). Under certain circumstances, an association may also be entitled to seek redress of i

ons, 64 F.3d 951, 955 (4th Cir. 1995); Franks v. Ross 313 F.3d 184, 194 (4th Cir.2002) (a cause of act

s of indi- vidualized hardship supplant the rules of clearly drafted statutes." Harris a Hutchinson, 209 F.3d 325, 330 (4th Cir. 2000); Spencer a Sutton, 239 F.3d 626, 629 (4th Cir2001). As discussed above, Plaintiff commenced suit anonymously in December 2003. At that time, Defendant was served w