Epstein Secrets

11 Case Name Rothstein Rosenfelt:II Adler, PA Case Numbers Manning Document Number:=t Docket Tear Er Pawn Motion to Appear pro lime vice by MartnCi Weinberg Filed by Interested Pay Jeffrey Efacin (Attachments. o ( I ) Proposed Order) (Nerwinh, Ronald) The following domina(t) are associated with this tran

P.A. Debtor. CASE NO. 09-34791-BKC-REIR CHAPTER 11 EX PARTE ORDER ADMITTING ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE This matter was considered without hearing on Martin G. Weinberg's Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice in this case pursuant to Local Rules 2090-1(B)(2) and 9013-l(C)(9). The Court having reviewed the Motion and good cau

opy of the Motion to Appear Pro Vice of Martin G. Weinberg of the firm Martin G. Weinberg, P.C., was served

C. nnorrisOrkiananuris.com Office of the US Trusice USTPRegion21.MM.FrFtgirukij gov Paul L. Ordain on behalf plonhangershanpa.corn, Christian A Petersen on behalf of Respondent Al Lamborn cpmersen@gunstercom Gary S Ph7Rps cm behalf of Defendant Bury Lipsitz aphillipogektillipilaveyors.coin Pata A

11 Case Name Rothstein Rosenfelt:II Adler, PA Case Numbers Manning Document Number:=t Docket Tear Er Pawn Motion to Appear pro lime vice by MartnCi Weinberg Filed by Interested Pay Jeffrey Efacin (Attachments. o ( I ) Proposed Order) (Nerwinh, Ronald) The following domina(t) are associated with this tran

opy of the Motion to Appear Pro Vice of Martin G. Weinberg of the firm Martin G. Weinberg, P.C., was served

P.A. Debtor. CASE NO. 09-34791-BKC-REIR CHAPTER 11 EX PARTE ORDER ADMITTING ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE This matter was considered without hearing on Martin G. Weinberg's Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice in this case pursuant to Local Rules 2090-1(B)(2) and 9013-l(C)(9). The Court having reviewed the Motion and good cau

C. nnorrisOrkiananuris.com Office of the US Trusice USTPRegion21.MM.FrFtgirukij gov Paul L. Ordain on behalf plonhangershanpa.corn, Christian A Petersen on behalf of Respondent Al Lamborn cpmersen@gunstercom Gary S Ph7Rps cm behalf of Defendant Bury Lipsitz aphillipogektillipilaveyors.coin Pata A

es' arguments and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court is awaiting supplemental briefing on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that motion after it is fully briefed. Also, because the proposed interveners seek intervention to reque

on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that

(d)(3)'s provision that victims may vindicate their CVRA For this reason, the Court respectfully disagrees with the interpretation adopted in In re Petersen, No. 10-298, 2010 WL 5108692 (N.D. Ind. Dec. 8, 2010), upon which the United States relies. See id. at *2 (holding that a "victim's 'right to be tre

es' arguments and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court is awaiting supplemental briefing on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that motion after it is fully briefed. Also, because the proposed interveners seek intervention to reque

on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that

(d)(3)'s provision that victims may vindicate their CVRA For this reason, the Court respectfully disagrees with the interpretation adopted in In re Petersen, No. 10-298, 2010 WL 5108692 (N.D. Ind. Dec. 8, 2010), upon which the United States relies. See id. at *2 (holding that a "victim's `right to be tre

es' arguments and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court is awaiting supplemental briefing on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that motion after it is fully briefed. Also, because the proposed interveners seek intervention to reque

on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that

(d)(3)'s provision that victims may vindicate their CVRA For this reason, the Court respectfully disagrees with the interpretation adopted in In re Petersen, No. 10-298, 2010 WL 5108692 (N.D. Ind. Dec. 8, 2010), upon which the United States relies. See id. at *2 (holding that a "victim's 'right to be tre

es' arguments and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court is awaiting supplemental briefing on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that motion after it is fully briefed. Also, because the proposed interveners seek intervention to reque

on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that

(d)(3)'s provision that victims may vindicate their CVRA For this reason, the Court respectfully disagrees with the interpretation adopted in In re Petersen, No. 10-298, 2010 WL 5108692 (N.D. Ind. Dec. 8, 2010), upon which the United States relies. See id. at *2 (holding that a "victim's `right to be tre

' arguments and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. ' The Court is awaiting supplemental briefing on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that motion after it is fully briefed. Also, because the proposed interveners seek intervention to reque

on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that

(d)(3)'s provision that victims may vindicate their CVRA For this reason, the Court respectfully disagrees with the interpretation adopted in In re Petersen, No. 10-298, 2010 WL 5108692 (N.D. Ind. Dec. 8, 2010), upon which the United States relies. See id. at *2 (holding that a "victim's 'right to be tre

MARTIN G. WEINBERG, ATTORNEY AT LAW 20 PARK ►LAZA, SUITE 1000 BOSTON. MASSACHUSETTS 02116 (617) 227-3700 FAX (617) 338-9538 NIGHT EMERGENCY (617) 901-3472 March

MARTIN G. WEINBERG, ATTORNEY AT LAW 20 PARK ►LAZA, SUITE 1000 BOS

Kan. 2015) (Sections 3771(a)(1) (right to protection from accused) and Section 3771(a)( ght to confer) do not apply in pre-charging context); In re Petersen, 2010 WL 5108692 *2 (_. Ind. 2010) ("the U.S. Attorney didn't have an obligation under the CVRA to confer with [victims] until after was filed and

es' arguments and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court is awaiting supplemental briefing on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that motion after it is fully briefed. Also, because the proposed interveners seek intervention to reque

on the Motion to Intervene of Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz (DE 56) and will rule on that

)(3)'s provision that victims may vindicate their CVRA 5 For this reason, the Court respectfully disagrees with the interpretation adopted in In re Petersen, No. 10-298, 2010 WL 5108692 (M. Ind. Dec. 8, 2010), upon which the United States relies. See id. at *2 (holding that a "victim's `right to be treat