Epstein Secrets

AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 11ih day of August, 2009. Copies furnished to: all counsel of record KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge rZ 9 EFTA00728682

T SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA NO. 09-80469-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE II, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EP

oses H. Cone Memorial Hosp. v. Mercury Constr., 460 U.S. 1 (1983). As the Eleventh Circuit explained in American Bankers Ins., 891 F.2d at 884: In Colorado River [Water Conserv. Dist. v. United States, 424 U.S. 800 (1976)] the Supreme Court announced that a federal court may dismiss an action because of para

ions to Epstein's Motion to Compel and/or Identify. This Notice should only be filed in 08-80119, not in all of the Epstein cases.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/20/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. (1c3) (Entered: 05/20/2009) 05/22/2009 15 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruc

No. 102 v. Epstein Assigned to: Judge Kenneth A. Marra Lead case: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Member case: (View

comprehensive disposition of litigation, would a federal court be authorized to dismiss federal parallel' claims that are initiated in state court. Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States, 424 U.S. 800 (1976). However, for the Colorado River doctrine to even apply, there must be clear Cong

aration for hearing 3.00 hr $1,500.00 04/01/2009 RDC Telephone conference with Jack G re: Bob J 0.20 hr $100.00 04/01/2009 RDC Hearing with Marra; conference with Brad; conference with Jack 2.10 hr $1,050.00 04/01/2009 RDC Conference with Pike and JMB re: discovery; telephone conference wi

nsel Stat. 2255 issues, constitutional issues 04/30/2009 RHB Legal research concurrent jurisdiction. comity, Jane Doe II, state/federal actions, Colorado River abstention 04/30/2009 RHB Draft Motion to Dismiss Jane Doe II (federal) 04/30/2009 RDC Receipt and review EW, LM, Doe -Federal - Edwards April

EIN, and Defendants. ) CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED'

purely federal issues in this case because there is an independent action under State law is absurd. For this argument the Defendant relies on the Colorado River abstention doctrine, clearly inapplicable to this case. Only in "exceptional" circumstances, to promote conservation of judicial resources and comp

EIN, and Defendants. ) CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDU

purely federal issues in this case because there is an independent action under State law is absurd. For this argument the Defendant relies on the Colorado River abstention doctrine, clearly 4 EFTA00222845 Case 9:09-cv-80469-KAM Document 20 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 5 of 20 inapplicable to