Epstein Secrets

E AND ORDERED this August 4, 2009, in Chambers, at West Palm Beach, Florida. LINNEA R. JOHIJ2UN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE CC: The Honorable Kenneth A. Marra All Counsel of Record 22 EFTA00723257 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 293 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/10/2009 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT

e No. 2 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-CIV-80119 MARRA/JOHNSON, the Court sustained Epstein's Fifth Amen

e 5 of 8 the objection 'so general and sweeping in nature" that they aamount[ed] to a blanket assertion of the privilege: Id. p.11. In the instant Motion for Reconsideration, Epstein has set forth additional facts and detailed reasoning successfully demonstrating how forcing him to answer these requests would realistica

1 and 2 v. United States, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON United States District Court, Southern D

heir failure to seek a prompt resolution of the case. However, in light of the Court's Order, it would seem that this issue is better resolved in a Motion for Reconsideration or on appeal of that ruling rather than in this Supplemental Briefing. Accordingly, the Intervenors' third argument is not addressed herein. 5 EFT

T OF FLORIDA JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, Vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al.

econsideration (DE #560). Jane Doe will respond to this amended motion for reconsideration. ARGUMENT Jane Doe has an interest in Jeffrey Epstein's Motion for Reconsideration (DE #560), which should be dismissed as utterly without merit (and seemingly filed simply for obstructionist purposes). Epstein's claim that the b

T OF FLORIDA JANE DOE, CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, Vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al.

econsideration (DE #560). Jane Doe will respond to this amended motion for reconsideration. ARGUMENT Jane Doe has an interest in Jeffrey Epstein's Motion for Reconsideration (DE #560), which should be dismissed as utterly without merit (and seemingly filed simply for obstructionist purposes). Epstein's claim that the b

1 and 2 v. United States, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON United States District Court, Southern D

heir failure to seek a prompt resolution of the case. However, in light of the Court's Order, it would seem that this issue is better resolved in a Motion for Reconsideration or on appeal of that ruling rather than in this Supplemental Briefing. Accordingly, the Intervenors' third argument is not addressed herein. 5 EFT

FREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Related cases: 08-80232, 08-08380, 08-8

ED OBJECTIONS AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Motion for Reconsideration and/or for Request Rule 4 Review and Appeal of Portions of the Magistrate's Order (DE 462) pursuant to Rule 60, Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 4, Rule 4(c) and