Epstein Secrets

NITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee ROY BLACK ET AL., Intervenor/Appellants INTERVENORS' RESP

iffs. Motion at 10-11. Intervenors did not, however, ignore controlling Supreme Court precedent, for the simple reason that Mohawk Industries, Inc. I. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), does not affect the right of non-parties such as intervenors to take an appeal from the district court's disclosure order. The

NITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee ROY BLACK ET AL., Intervenor/Appellants INTERVENORS' RESP

iffs. Motion at 10-11. Intervenors did not, however, ignore controlling Supreme Court precedent, for the simple reason that Mohawk Industries, Inc. I. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), does not affect the right of non-parties such as intervenors to take an appeal from the district court's disclosure order. The

was served on July 2, 2013, on the following using the Court's CMJECF system: Attorneys for the Government Roy Black, Esq. Jackie Perczek, Esq. Black, Srebnick, Komspan & Stumpf, P.A. /s/ Paul G. Cassell Paul G. Cassell 22 EFTA00209594

(D.C. Cir. 2013) 13, 17 Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida I United States, 516 F.3d 1235, 1265 (11th Cir. 2008) 21 Mohawk Industries, Inc. I. Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009) passim Nat'l Super Spuds, Inc.' N.Y. Mercantile Exch., 591 F.2d 174, 178 (2d Cir.1979) 13 Perlman I United States, 247 U

s, 1. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. Roy Black, Martin G. Weinberg, Jeffrey Epstein, Intervenors

I. United States, 247 U.S. 7, 38 S.Ct. 417, 62 L.Ed. 950 (1918). Second, they argue that a decision of the Supreme Court, Mo- hawk Industries, Inc. I. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100, 130 S.Ct. 599, 175 L.Ed.2d 458 (2009), forecloses an interlocutory appeal of a denial of a claim of privilege. (6](71 The courts of