Epstein Secrets

OF SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING BY LIMITED INTERVENORS BLACK, WEINBERG, LEFKOWITZ, AND EPSTEIN The limited in

RICA, Defendant. REPLY IN SUPPORT OF SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING BY LIMITED INTERVENORS BLACK, WEINBERG, LEFKOWITZ, AND EPSTEIN The limited intervenors Black, Weinberg, Lefkowtiz, and Epstein re-file this reply, which is identical to the reply that was previously filed during the litigation on intervention. We only

limited intervenors Jeffrey Epstein and attorneys Black, Weinberg, and Lefkowitz, to strike the plaintif

TES OF AMERICA, Defendant. MOTION TO STRIKE NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY This is a motion by limited intervenors Jeffrey Epstein and attorneys Black, Weinberg, and Lefkowitz, to strike the plaintiffs' notice of supplemental authority [DE 173] because the "authority" cited by the plaintiffs — a comment by

ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Intervenor Roy Black Black, Srebnick, Komspan & Stumpf, P.A. 201 So

eth A. Marra on 9/26/2011. (ir) (Entered: 09/26/2011) 09/27/2011 100 RESPONSE/REPLY to 94 Supplement Briefing in Support of Motion to Intervene of Black, Weinberg, and Lefkowitz by United States of America. ( Ann Marie) (Entered: 09/27/2011) 09/28/2011 i (Court only) ***Motions terminated: 41 Plaintiffs MO

REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO INTERVENE OF ROY BLACK, MARTIN WEINBERG, AND JAY LEFKOWITZ Jane Doe I a

ENE OF ROY BLACK, MARTIN WEINBERG, AND JAY LEFKOWITZ Jane Doe I and Jane Doe 2 oppose intervention because according to them, proposed intervenors Black, Weinberg and Lefkowitz do not have a claim of privilege or confidentiality. Jane Doe I and Jane Doe 2 contend that all the correspondence at issue was alread

l the arguments advanced by proposed intervenors Black, Weinberg, and Lefkowitz in their motion to inte

s and emails that Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 already have remain confidential. Mr. Epstein adopts all the arguments advanced by proposed intervenors Black, Weinberg, and Lefkowitz in their motion to intervene and its attached motion for a protective order [DE 56), as well as during the August 12, 2011 hearing.

l the arguments advanced by proposed intervenors Black, Weinberg, and Lefkowitz in their motion to inter

s and emails that Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 already have remain confidential. Mr. Epstein adopts all the arguments advanced by proposed intervenors Black, Weinberg, and Lefkowitz in their motion to intervene and its attached motion for a protective order [DE 56], as well as during the August 12, 2011 hearing.

ORDER grantin8/2i Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to supplemental briefing in support o£54, MOTION to Intervene of ii ?o, [11 ,Black,Mar i fisiaLi ejkowitz. Responsesdueby1011 011 0/2 . Signed by Judge on 9/28/2011. (ir) (Entered: 09282011) 09/29/2011 .121 Unopposed MOTION for

ed by Judge on 9/26/2011. (ir) (Entered: 09/26/2011) 09/27/2011 jail RESPONSE/REPLY tom Supplement Briefing in Support of Motion to Intervene of Black, Weinberg, and Lelkowitz by United States of America. (Villafana, Ann Marie) (Entered: 09/27/2011) 09/28/2011 jaL MOTION for Extension of Time to File Respo

their opposition to the intervention of attorneys Black, Weinberg, and Lefkowitz that Mr. Epstein "is th

9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 93 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2011 Page 3 of 9 First, they argued in their opposition to the intervention of attorneys Black, Weinberg, and Lefkowitz that Mr. Epstein "is the real party in interest" and that "harm from the release of the materials (if any) could be only to Jeffrey