Epstein Secrets

tion, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order is hereby GRANTED. DONE AND ORDERED this day of June, 2009. KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge Copies to all Counsel of Record EFTA00182851 Case 9:U8-cv-80119-KAM Document 144 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/08/200

RN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON VS. Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN and De

., 123 F.R.D. 437, 439 (S.D.N.Y.1988). Sexual assault victims are a paradigmatic example of those entitled to a grant of anonymity. See Doe No. 2 v. Kolko, 242 F.R.D. 193 (ED. N.Y. 2006); Doe v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield United of Wisc., 112 F.3d 869, 872 (7th Cir.1997) ("fictitious names are allowed w

F FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defen

Co., 123 F.R.D. 437, 439 (S.D.N.Y.1988). Sexual assault victims are a paradigmatic example of those entitled to a grant of anonymity. See Doe No. 21 Kolko, 242 F.R.D. 193 (E.D. N.Y. 2006); Doe'. Blue Cross & Blue Shield United of Wisc., 112 F.3d 869, 872 (7th Cir.1997) ("fictitious names are allowed w

FFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON CAS

ication poses a risk of retaliatory physical or mental harm to the requesting party or even more critically, to innocent non-parties. Doe. No. 2 v. Kolko, 242 F.R.D. 193, 195-98 (E.D.N.Y. 2006), citing, Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 106i), 281.1.S.C,A. Further, Plaintiffs cite cases wherein a psychologist