Epstein Secrets

red by the Fifth Amendment. See, e.g., Rajah v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 427, 442 (2nd Cir. 2008) (“. . . a taxp

may be in the case.” Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978). The correspondence w

o Fifth Amendment protection. See, e.g., Rajah v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 427, 442 (2d Cir. 2008)(“Just as a taxp

nt discovery stage. See Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978). Accordingly, Epstein

red by the courts to be ‘required records,’ are as a matter of law not subject to Fifth Amendment protection.” Omnibus Order at 12 (citing Rajah v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 427, 442 (2d Cir. 2008)); In re Doe, 711 F.2d 1187, 1191 (2d Cir. 1983); In re Doe, 97 F.R.D. 640, 644-45 (S.D.N.Y. 1982)). Third, the m

t bears on, or that reasonably could lead to another matter that could bear on any issue that is or may be in the case.” Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978). The correspondence with the government agencies may well point Jane Doe in the direction of admissible evidence, and th