Epstein Secrets

CT. S.D. OF HA. • MIAMI CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 2 ("J

008) 07/16/2008 22, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE why default should not be entered against Defendant. Show Cause Response due by 7/28/2008. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 7/16/08. (ir) (Entered: 07/16/2008) EFTA00222694 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 07,17'2008 Page 1 of 4 UNITED ST

able right of action"), on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" Ru

09/23/2008 a ORDER denying as moot 31 Motion to Dismiss; denying as moot 9 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 9/23/08. (ir) (Entered: 09/23/2008) 09/25/2008 39 SCHEDULING REPORT- Rule 26(O. (Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 09/25/2008) https://ecf.flsd.uscou

e No. 3 v. Epstein Assigned to: Judge Kenneth A. Marra Lead case: 2:flasaAhd Member case: (View Member

it 41 Entered a,. .-LSD Docket 10,..../2008 Page 4 of 10 Case No. CV-80232-Marra-Johnson Page No. 4 doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewiczt. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (200 ; Neitzli. Williams 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) Rule 12(

it is set at 36 pages. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 6/9/2009. (ir) (Entered: 06/10/2009) 06/10/2

behalf of Jeffrey Epstein. Redocketed SEE Image 19 (ail) (Entered: 08/28/2008) 09/03/2008 21 r ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Kenneth A. Marra for all further proceedings. Judge William J. Zloch no longer https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/egi-bin/D1ctRpt.p11/985369616841682-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009

cv-80811-KAM Document 35 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/07/2009 Page 4 of 7 . v. Epstein, et al. age 4 doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506. 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992. 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002); Neitzke v. Williams. 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827. 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" Ru

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-Marra/Johnson Plaintiff, Defendant. I -------------

if doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.E

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON C.M. A., Plaintiff, v. EPSTEIN and D

zable right of action"), on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002). Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (198.9) (" R

is Court in JANE DOE NO. 2 (Case No. 08-CV-80119-Marra/Johnson), JANE DOE NO. 3 (Case No. 08-CV- 80232-M

able right of action"), on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" Ru

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2 Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY

able right of action"), on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" Ru