Epstein Secrets

e Also contains documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #3 P-013227 April 23, 2008 Memo from Jeffrey Sloman to Office of Professional Responsibility re Self Reporting, Corrected Version of the previously submitted April 21, 2008 Letter to OPR Privacy Ac

ter with attorney handwritten notes Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Suppl. Box #3 P-013334 Thru P-013337 File folder entitled "11/13/07 Sloman to Lefkowitz (was this sent?" containing draft 11/13/07 letter from responding to J. Lefkowitz's letter Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product

s "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and Local Rule 56.1, move for summary judgment on the issue of the United States Government's violation of their rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), where no genuine issue of material fact exists.' In support, they state: INT

9 Exhibit 76. 28 EFTA00804355 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 29 of 57 86. On about December 6, 2007, Sloman sent a letter to Lefkowitz again recognizing the rights of the victims, and also recognizing that the victims had not yet been afforded any rights,

s "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and Local Rule 56.1, move for summary judgment on the issue of the United States Government's violation of their rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), where no genuine issue of material fact exists.' In support, they state: INT

9 Exhibit 76. 28 EFTA00591632 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 29 of 57 86. On about December 6, 2007, Sloman sent a letter to Lefkowitz again recognizing the rights of the victims, and also recognizing that the victims had not yet been afforded any rights,

s "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and Local Rule 56.1, move for summary judgment on the issue of the United States Government's violation of their rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), where no genuine issue of material fact exists.' In support, they state: INT