Epstein Secrets

ket 11/11/2010 Page 4 of 16 CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON 4. Marsigliano was provided with the add

e court must then "weigh and determine (the) disputed issues of facts on a Rule 12(b)(5) motion." Cranford v. United States, 359 F.Supp.2d 981, 984 (E.D. Cal. 2005). An evidentiary hearing is the proper vehicle for resolving this particular factual dispute. See Blair v. City of Worcester, 522 F.3d 105, 1

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFRE

purely procedural in nature and does not create a federal physician-patient or hospital-patient privilege." Allen v. Woodford 2007 WL 309485 *I I (E.D. Cal. 2007). Under HIPAA, health care information may be disclosed in discovery under a qualified protective order, which prohibits using or disclosing

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA-JOHNSON Plaintiff; v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defend

CV-80893-Marra-Johnson Page 7 Cal. Aug. 19, 2009); U.S. v. Ferenci, 2009 WL 2579102, fn. 1 (ED. Cal. Aug. 19, 2009); U.S. 2009 WL 2567831, fn. 1 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2009); U.S. v. Zane, 2009 WL 2567832, al (ED. Cal. Aug. 18 2009). In each of these cases, the referenced footnote states — Prior to July

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

(Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) objection, as noted in the case cited in Plaintiffs motion Allen v. Woodford, 2007 WL 309485 (E.D. Cal. 2007), (p. 9), HIPPA institutes procedural safeguards to protect the privacy of an individual's medical information and history. In the context of

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFRE

purely procedural in nature and does not create a federal physician-patient or hospital-patient privilege." Allen v. Woodford 2007 WL 309485 *I I (E.D. Cal. 2007). Under HIPAA, health care information may be disclosed in discovery under a qualified protective order, which prohibits using or disclosing

.: Dg C V gocq3 rAyniz_Rs JANE DOE, 08-80893-Civ-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defen

ases, with minimal discussion. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 120-121, 93 S.Ct. 705 (1973); See also, E.E.O.C. v. ABM Industries, Inc., 249 F.R.D. 588 (E.D. Cal. 2008). Likewise, pseudonym filing is typically accepted by the courts in other cases where the nature of the pleading unveils highly sensitive inf