Case 9:09-cv-80656-KAM

Case 9:09-cv-80656-KAM Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-Ryskamp JANE DOE No. 102, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant, RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO PROCEED ANONYMOUSLY AND EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO COMPEL AND/OR IDENTIFY JANE DOE #102 IN THE STYLE OF THIS CASE AND MOTION TO IDENTIFY JANE DOE #102 IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein" or "Defendant"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Response In Opposition to Plaintiff, Jane Doe #102's Motion to Proceed Anonymously and files his Motion requesting that this Court enter an order identifying in the style of this case the complete legal name of the Plaintiff, JANE DOE #102 ("JANE DOE"), to substitute her complete legal name In this case in place of "JANE DOE" and, equally important, allowing Defendant to identify her in various subpoenas that Epstein must serve so Epstein can defend this case. In support, Mr. Epstein states as follows: EFTA00175214 • Case 9:09-cv-80656-KAM Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2009 Page 3 of 12 denied, but Epstein's Motion to Identify Jane Doe must be granted. Despite Plaintiff's allegations in the Motion to Proceed Anonymously, this Court has not "allowed" any Plaintiff to proceed anonymously. Quite simply, that is the way each Plaintiff chose to file each of their respective cases, all of which are currently being challenged in those other matters by Motion to Identify. 4. Importantly, JANE DOE claims that she has and will suffer ". . .physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, separation from her family . . . , and medical and psychological expenses. . . , loss on income, loss of the capacity to earn income In the future, and loss of the capacity to enjoy life" ¶¶28, Comp. DE 1; see also ¶¶36, 40, 44, 48, 52, 56, 61, 65, and 69, Comp., DE 1. 5. Epstein has a constitutional due process right to defend himself and to seek the production of information that will assist in his defense of the allegations in the Complaint. In this case, Plaintiffs counsel intends on serving subpoenas on Plaintiffs treating physicians and other third parties. Thus, this motion seeks not only a denial Plaintiffs Motion to Proceed Anonymously but to Identify JANE DOE In the style of this case and to identify JANE DOE in various third-party subpoenas for discovery purposes. 6. The undersigned's experience In "Jane Doe" lawsuits is that once a Plaintiff is identified, other individuals come forward in the discovery phase with information which often directly contradicts allegations as to the events and 3 EFTA00175215 Case 9:09-cv-80656-KAM Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2009 Page 5 of 12 agreed that the subpoenas filed with the clerk would be redacted. Several attorneys agreed to this procedure in those cases. In Federal Court, subpoenas are not filed with the clerk. Thus, In this matter, the undersigned offered to serve the third-party subpoenas with plaintiff's full name, date of birth and social security number (last four digits) and would agree to redact any identifying information on any documents filed with this court if that ultimately became necessary. 9. Moreover, when an order from the court is attached to the Subpoena, treaters and other third parties produce the records and show up to the depositions with the records requested because the deponent knows what to bring by virtue of knowing the identity of the Plaintiff. 10. Epstein's counsel intends to serve and depose witnesses duces tecum. If Epstein is not permitted to identify JANE DOE (thus allowing her to proceed anonymously), how will any deponent know who the parties are and what to bring to the deposition pursuant to the duces tecum? Further, how will Epstein be able to defend the claims. Just like the Plaintiff, Epstein is entitled to due process. If the Court allows Jane Doe to proceed anonymously, Jane Doe will be permitted to present her case and Epstein will be limited in his defenses. 11. While it is within the sound discretion of this court to allow a party to proceed anonymously, Plaintiff should not attempt to utilize that discretion as a shield from legitimate and necessary discovery. Epstein has a fundamental due process right to conduct discovery. EFTA00175216 Case 9:09-cv-80656-KAM Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2009 Page 7 of 12 b. whether the party defending the suit would be prejudiced; c. whether the plaintiff is required to disclose information of utmost intimacy; d. whether the plaintiff is compelled to admit an intention to engage in illegal conduct, thereby risking criminal prosecution; e. whether the Plaintiff would risk suffering injury if identified; f. whether the interests of children are at stake; and g. whether there are less drastic means of protecting the legitimate interests of either party. Doe v. Frank 951 F.2d at 323. Plaintiff does not fall under any of the factors. Moreover, even If she did meet one of the factors, "[t]he fact that [a] Doe [Plaintiff] may suffer some personal embarrassment, standing alone, does not require the granting of a request to proceed under a pseudonym." Id' see also Doe v. Rostker, 89 F.R.D. 159 (N.D. Calif. 1981). Any substantial privacy interests JANE DOE has must outweigh the customary and constitutionally embedded presumption of openness to judicial proceedings. Doe v. Frank, 951 F.2d at 323; Doe v. Berostron, 2009 WL 528623 (C.A.9(Or.))(denying request to proceed anonymously in civil action by Plaintiff where Plaintiff's arrest, prosecution and acquittal were matters of public record). 14. In Sweetland v. State, 535 So.2d 646 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), the court reasoned that the purpose of discovery is to eliminate the likelihood of surprise and to Insure a fair opportunity to prepare for trial. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(1)• see also Surf Drugs. Inc.. v. Vermette 236 So.2d 108, 111 (Fla. 7 EFTA00175217 Case 9:09-cv-80656-KAM Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2009 Page 9 of 12 damages. Plaintiff is claiming emotional/psychological damages. Therefore, Epstein is entitled to know her psychological condition(s) before and after the alleged incident(s) she references in the Complaint. In particular, JANE DOE alleges specific disorders as a result of Epstein's alleged conduct — suffer . .physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, separation from her family . . . , and medical and psychological expenses. . . , loss on income, loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and loss of the capacity to enjoy life." (Emphasis Added). See supra. Epstein is also entitled to know, among other things, whether she had any physical complaints or whether there was ever any evidence of physical battery on JANE DOE's body from the acts she complains of in the Complaint. The need to serve third-party subpoenas on medical doctors is a basic discovery need related to the claims alleged by JANE DOE for which Plaintiff's counsel refuses to compromise. Balas v. Ruzzo 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998)(discoverability of Plaintiff's history of sexual activity is relevant to damages); United States v. Bear Stops 997 F.2d 451 (81h Cir. 1993)(deals with "admissibility of other acts of sexual abuse by individuals other than the defendant to explain why a victim of abuse exhibited behavioral manifestations of a sexually abused child.") If Plaintiff saw a psychologist or other physician during or after the time periods she claims she was assaulted by Epstein but either did not discuss or did discuss the incidents (or lack thereof) would be 9 EFTA00175218 • Case 9:09-cv-80656-KAM Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/11/2009 Page 11 of 12 was charged with any crimes. If Jane Doe was charged with crimes, Epstein is entitled to obtain certified copies of those crimes Plaintiff may have committed for purposes of discovery and impeachment. Questions will be asked regarding those crimes (e.g., Have you been convicted of a crime of dishonesty or false statement? If so, how many times? Have you been convicted of a felony? If so, how many times?) To hold otherwise would not only prevent broad discovery but would ultimately result in reversible error at any trial. II. Conclusion and Prayer for Relief 22. Epstein requests the following relief: a. That JANE DOE's Motion to Proceed Anonymously be denied; b. That this Court grant Epstein's Motion and that JANE DOE be identified by her legal name in the style of this case; and c. That Epstein be granted leave to identify JANE DOE by her legal name in Third-Party Subpoenas (but not file them in Court or, if required, in a redacted form). WHEREFORE, Epstein, Jeffrey Epstein, respectfully requests that this Court enter said order granting the relief requested above, and for such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. By: ROBERT D. C ITTON, JR., ESQ. MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Certificate of Service I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this _EL day of Mav, 2009 11 EFTA00175219 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 1 of 7 AEV U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (West Palm Beach) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 9:09-cv-80656-KAM Doe No. 102 v. Epstein Assigned to: Judge Kenneth A. Marra Lead case: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Member case: (View Member Case) Cause: 28:1391 Personal Injury Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 102 V. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Date Filed: 05/01/2009 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 360 P.I.: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question represented by Katherine Warthen Ezell Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg et al City National Bank Building 25 W Flagler Street Suite 800 Miami FL 33130-1780 Fax: Email: LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Robert C. Josefsberg Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg et al City National Bank Building 25 W Flagler Street Suite 800 Miami FL 33130-1780 Fax: Email: LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Robert Deweese Critton , Jr. Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman https://ecf.flsd.useourts.gov/egi-bin/DIctRpt.p17825839498761356-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175220 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 2 of 7 515 N Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach , FL 33401-2918 Amicus United States of America represented by Fax: Email: LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED United States Attorney's Office 500 East Broward Blvd 7th Floor Ft Lauderdale , FL 33394 xt. 3546 Fax: Email: LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # dear Docket Text 05/01/2009 1 r COMPLAINT and Demand for Jury Trial against Jeffrey Epstein. Filing fee $350.00. Receipt No. 100030, filed by Jane Doe No. 102.(caw) (Entered: 05/04/2009) 05/01/2009 2 r Summons Issued as to Jeffrey Epstein. (caw) (Entered: 05/04/2009) 05/01/2009 3 Sealed Document. (igo) (Entered: 05/04/2009) 05/01/2009 4 Sealed Document. (igo) (Entered: 05/04/2009) 05/11/2009 5 r RESPONSE/REPLY to 4 Sealed Document, 3 Sealed Document Opposition to Motion to Proceed Anonymously by Jeffrey Epstein. (Critton, Robert) (Entered: 05/11/2009) 05/11/2009 6 r NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Robert Deweese Critton, Jr on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein (Critton, Robert) (Entered: 05/11/2009) 05/11/2009 7 MOTION to Compel and/or identify Jane doe #102 in the style of this case ( Responses due by 5/29/2009), MOTION to identify jane doe #102 in the third-party subpoenas for purposes of discovery, with incorporated memorandum of law by Jeffrey Epstein.(see docket entry 5 for image) (tas) (Entered: 05/12/2009) https://eef.flsd.uscourts.gov/egi-bin/DktRpt.p17825839498761356-L_801 0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175221 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 3 of 7 05/12/2009 8 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 5 Response/Reply (Other) Error - Two or More Document Events Filed as One; Correction - Additional event(s) 7 MOTION to Compel and/or identift Jane doe #102 in the style of this case MOTION to identify jane doe #102 in the third-party subpoenas for purposes of discovery, with incorporated memorandum of law. docketed by Clerk. Instruction to Filer - In the future, please select all applicable events. It is not necessary to refile this document. (tas) (Entered: 05/12/2009) 05/13/2009 9 r ORDER of Transfer/REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Kenneth A. Marra for all further proceedings. Senior Judge Kenneth L. Ryskamp no longer assigned to case. Signed by Senior Judge Kenneth L. Ryskamp on 5/12/2009. (tas) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/14/2009 Cases associated. (ir) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/14/2009 10 n ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES. Hereinafter all motions and other court filings that relate to discovery and all procedural motions that relate to multiple cases shall be styled with all of the case names and numbers and shall be filed in Case No. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/14/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. (ir) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/14/2009 11 r ORDER REQUESTING UNITED STATES PROVIDE POSITION TO MOTION TO STAY. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/14/2009. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Motion to Stay DE 51) Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM et al. 00 (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/14/2009 12 ORDER terminating 7 Motion to Compel; terminating 7 Motion. See Order consolidating cases. See procedural motions pending: DE 91 in 08-80119.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/14/2009. (1c3) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/20/2009 13 n NOTICE by Filing Withdrawal of Previously Raised Ob'ections to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Compel And/Or Identi in the Style of This Case and Motion to Identify . in Third- arty Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, Or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Inorporated Memorandum of Law Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al.(Hill, Jack) (Entered: 05/20/2009) 05/20/2009 14 ORDER S G in all Epstein cases EXCEPT case no. 08-80119: Notice by M. of Filing Withdrawal of Previously Raised Objections 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 Instruction to Filer re 11 Notice (Other), Notice (Other) filed by .. Error - Incorrect Document https://eef.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?825839498761356-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175222 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 4 of 7 Link/No Link;. Instruction to filer - In the future, please link the document to the proper entry. It is not necessary to refile this document. (Is) (Entered: 05/22/2009) 05/26/2009 16 n Plaintiffs MOTION to Preserve Evidence Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence and Incorporated Memorandum of Law by Jane Doe No. 101, Jane Doe No. 102. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit "A", # 2 Exhibit "B", # 3 Text of Proposed Order)Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM, 9:09-cv-80591-KAM, 9:09- cv-80656-KAM(Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 05/26/2009) 05/27/2009 17 ORDER terminating(28) Motion to Preserve Evidence in case 9:09-cv- 80591-KAM; terminating(16) Motion to Preserve Evidence in case 9:09- cv-80656-KAM This motion is pending ONLY in case no. 08-80119.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/27/2009. (1c3) (Entered: 05/27/2009) 05/27/2009 18 r NOTICE by Jane Doe re (111 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Plaintiffs MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to (91 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identity of Doe in Style of Case and Third-Party Subpoenas (replaces Docket entry 90)Plaintiffs MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to (91 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identity of Doe in Style of Case and Third-Party Subpoenas (replaces Docket entry 90) (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al.(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 05/27/2009) 05/28/2009 19 ORDER STRIKING Notice by Jane Doe in all Epstein cases EXCEPT in case 08-80119. This Notice should only be filed in 08-80119, not in all of the Epstein cases... Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/28/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. (1c3) (Entered: 05/28/2009) 05/29/2009 20 r NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by on behalf of United States of America Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80 119-KAM et al. , IM) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05/29/2009 21 n RESPONSE to Motion re (72 in 9:08-cv-80380-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (62) Amended Complaint, (57 in 9:08-cv-80232- KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (50) Amended Complaint, (24 in 9:08-cv-80893-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (1) Complaint, (23 in 9:08-cv-80994-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (18) Amended Complaint, (22 in 9:08-cv-80993-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (19) Amended Complaint, (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint, (68 in 9:08-cv-80381- KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (60) Amended Complaint, (51 in 9:08-cv-80811-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (40) Amended Complaint and or Continue Action Filed Pursuant to Court's Order Requesting Government's Position filed by United States of America. https://ec£flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?825839498761356-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175223 CM/ECF - Live Database - 11. d Page 5 of 7 Rtlue17.6/8/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM et al. ( , M =) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05/29/2009 22 RESPONSE in Opposition re (90 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identify Doe in Style of Case and in Third-Party Subpoenas, (91 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identity of Doe in Style of Case and Third-Party Subpoenas (replaces Docket entry 90) filed by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al.(Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05/29/2009 23 ORDER STRIKING (124 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM, 105 in 9:08-cv-80811- ICAM, 74 in 9:08-cv-80993-KAM, 72 in 9:08-cv-80893-KAM, 106 in 9:08- cv-80232-KAM, 123 in 9:08-cv-80380-KAM, 35 in 9:09-cv-80591-KAM, 25 in 9:09-cv-80469-KAM, 60 in 9:08-cv-80994-KAM, 22 in 9:09-cv- 80656-1CAM, 107 in 9:08-cv-80381-KAM) Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101 DO NOT FILE IN EVERY EPSTEIN CASE. SEE ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/29/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08- cv-80119-KAM et al. (Ic3) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05/29/2009 24 r MOTION for Leave to File UNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STAY OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO UNSEAL THE NONPROSECUTION AGREEMENT by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM et al.(Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05/29/2009 25 r MOTION for Hearing MOTION TO RESCHEDULE HEARING by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al.(Josefsberg, Robert) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 06/01/2009 26 ORDER STRIKING (28 in 9:09-cv-80469-KAM, 126 in 9:08-cv-80380- KAM, 109 in 9:08-cv-80232-KAM, 25 in 9:09-cv-80656-KAM, 77 in 9:08- cv-80993-KAM, 38 in 9:09-cv-80591-KAM, 110 in 9:08-cv-80381-KAM, 63 in 9:08-cv-80994-KAM, 75 in 9:08-cv-80893-KAM, 108 in 9:08-cv- 80811-KAM) Motion to Continue Hearing filed by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101, (76 in 9:08-cv-80993-ICAM, 109 in 9:08-cv-80381-KAM, 108 in 9:08-cv-80232-KAM, 62 in 9:08-cv-80994-KAM, 125 in 9:08-cv- 80380-KAM, 74 in 9:08-cv-80893-KAM, 24 in 9:09-cv-80656-KAM, 37 in 9:09-cv-80591-KAM, 107 in 9:08-cv-80811-KAM, 27 in 9:09-cv-80469- KAM) Motion for Leave to File, filed by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101. THESE DOCUMENTS SHOULD BE FILED ONLY IN 08-80119. SEE CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 6/1/2009. (1c3) (Entered: 06/01/2009) 06/04/2009 27 r REPLY to Response to Motion re (113 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) Plaintiffs MOTION Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe 102's Motion for No- Contact Order Plaints Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Reply to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Response to Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and https://ecf.flsd.useourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17825839498761356-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175224 CM/ECF - Live Database - tlsd Page 6 of 7 Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for a No-Contact Order filed by Jane Doe No. 101, Jane Doe No. 102. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. (Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 06/04/2009) 06/04/2009 28 ORDER STRIKING (112 in 9:08-cv-80381-ICAM, 111 in 9:08-cv-80232- KAM, 136 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM, 111 in 9:08-cv-80811-KAM, 128 in 9:08-cv-80380-KAM, 65 in 9:08-cv-80994-KAM, 79 in 9:08-cv-80893- KAM, 42 in 9:09-cv-80591-KAM, 27 in 9:09-cv-80656-KAM, 32 in 9:09- cv-80469-KAM, 79 in 9:08-cv-80993-ICAM) Reply to Response to Motion, filed by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101 Document stricken for failure to follow Courts orders. DO NOT FILE A DOCUMENT IN EVERY EPSTEIN CASE if it is to be filed only in 08-80119. See Case Management Order and contact CM/ECF Support for assistance in proper filing.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 6/4/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119- KAM et al. (1c3) (Entered: 06/04/2009) 06/08/2009 29 ri RESPONSE to Motion re (91 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identity of Doe in Style of Case and Third-Party Subpoenas (replaces Docket entry 90) filed by Jane Doe. Replies due by 6/18/2009. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al.(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 06/08/2009) 06/08/2009 30 r NOTICE by Jane Doe re (113 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Plaintiffs MOTION Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe 102's Motion for No-Contact Order -Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder Associated Cases: 9:08- cv-80119-KAM et al.(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 06/08/2009) 06/10/2009 31 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 29 Response to Motion, filed by Jane Doe. Error - Document Incomplete, i.e. Missing Page 1 on Attachments: #2 Exhibit B . (Is) (Entered: 06/10/2009) 06/10/2009 32 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 30 Notice (Other), Notice (Other) filed by Jane Doe. Error - Wrong Event Selected;. Instruction to Filer - In the future, please select the proper event, i.e. Notice of Adoption. It is not necessary to refile this document. (ls) (Entered: 06/10/2009) View Selected or Download Selected PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt 06/10/2009 14:37:13 PACER Login: du4480 Client Code: r it https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p ?825839498761356-L_801 0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175225 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 7 of 7 !Description: Billable Pages: Docket Report !! Search Criteria: 4 Cost: 9:09-cv-80656- KAM 0.32 https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/egi-bin/DktRpt.pl?825839498761356-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175226 Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/27/2009 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08- 80993-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 7, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. AMENDED COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 7 ("Jane" or "Jane Doe"), brings this Complaint against Jeffrey Epstein, as follows: Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue 1. Jane Doe No. 7 is a citizen and resident of the State of Florida, and is sui juris. 2. This Complaint is brought under a fictitious name to protect the identity of the Plaintiff because this Complaint makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor. 3. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein is a citizen and resident of the State of New York. 4. This is an action for damages in excess of $50 million. 5. This Court has jurisdiction of this action and the claims set forth herein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a), as the matter in controversy (i) exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs; and (ii) is between citizens of different states. 6. Additionally, this Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 because Plaintiff alleges a claim under the laws of the United States. This Court has supplemental - 1 - EFTA00175227 Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/27/2009 Page 3 of 8 generally $200 to $300 per "massage" session - and who were perceived as less likely to complain to authorities or have credibility if allegations of improper conduct were made. This was an important element of Epstein's plan. 12. Epstein's plan and scheme reflected a particular pattern and method. The underage victim would be brought to Epstein's mansion, where she would be introduced to Epstein's assistant. Mould then bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table in addition to other furnishings. The girl would then find herself alone in the room with Epstein, who would be wearing only a towel. He woulddirect he rigl to give him a massage. Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including 13. Consistent with the foregoing plan and scheme, when Jane Doe was 16 years old, she was recruited by=It o give Epstein a massage for monetary compensation. Jane was brought to Epstein's mansion in Palm Beach. Once there, Jane was introduced to all who led her up the flight of stairs to the room with the massage table. In this room, Jane was directed by Epstein to give him a massage. During this massage, Epstein sexually assaulted Jane and Epstein then paid Jane money. 14. Jane returned on many occasions to the Palm Beach mansion to provide Epstein with massages for money. On those occasions, Epstein engaged in sexual contact and activity with Jane, which included, among other things, Epstein touching Jane's placing on her his sexual abuse continued over a period of approximately 18-24 months. 15. As a result of these encounters with Epstein, Jane experienced confusion, shame, humiliation and embarrassment, and has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries. - 3 - EFTA00175228 , Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/27/2009 Page 5 of 8 in mental or sexual injury that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. 26. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. Epstein knew or had reason to know that his intentional and outrageous conduct would cause emotional distress and damage to Jane Doe, or Epstein acted with reckless disregard of the high probability of causing severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. 27. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's intentional or reckless conduct, Jane Doe, has suffered and will continue to suffer severe mental anguish and pain. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 7 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, costs, punitive damages, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. COUNT III Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 U.S.C. ti2422 28. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through I5 above. 29. Epstein used a facility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, induce or entice Jane Doe, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense. 30. On June 30, 2008, Epstein entered a plea of guilty to violations of Florida §§ 796.07 and 796.03, in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case nos. 2008-cf- 00938 I AXX XMB and 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB), for conduct involving the same plan and scheme as alleged herein. 31. As to Plaintiff Jane Doe, Epstein could have been charged with criminal violations of Florida Statute §796.07(2) (including subsections (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) thereof), and other - 5 - EFTA00175229 Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/27/2009 Page 7 of 8 Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. /s/ Adam D. Horowitz -7- EFTA00175230 Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 86 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/10/2009 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 7 Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S FIRST AMENDED ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S (FIRST) AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, files his Answer to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint [DE 19] and states: 1. Without knowledge and deny. 2. As to the allegations in paragraphs 2, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - "Olt would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. ad §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self- Incrimination (".,.court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. - EFTA00175231 Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 86 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/10/2009 Page 3 of 10 Jane Doe No. 7 v. Epstein Page 3 7. As to the allegations in paragraphs 7 through 15 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Defendant exercises his Fifth Amendment Privilege against self- incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self- Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - `lilt would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 FIa.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants In civil actions. —"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self-incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. 8. In response to the allegations of paragraph 16, Defendant realleges and adopts his responses to paragraphs 1 through 15 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth in paragraphs 1 through 7 above herein. 9. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-Incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 17 through 22 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4Ih DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination EFTA00175232 Casa 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 86 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/10/2009 Page 5 of 10 Jane Doe No. 7 v. Epstein Page 5 §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 FIa.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants In civil actions. —"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self- incrimination], because affirmative defenses do not constitute the kind of voluntary application for affirmative relief" which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. 12. In response to the allegations of paragraph 29, Defendant realleges and adopts his responses to paragraphs 1 through 15 of the Second Amended Complaint set forth in paragraphs 1 through 7 above herein. 13. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 30 through 35 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment - lilt would be incongruous to have different standards determine the validity of a claim of privilege based on the same feared prosecution, depending on whether the claim was asserted in state or federal court."); 5 Fed.Prac. & Proc. Civ. 3d §1280 Effect of Failure to Deny — Privilege Against Self-Incrimination ("...court must treat the defendant's claim of privilege as equivalent to a specific denial."). See also 24 FIa.Jur.2d Evidence §592. Defendants in civil actions. —"... a civil defendant who raises an affirmative defense is not precluded from asserting the privilege [against self- EFTA00175233 Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 86 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/10/2009 Page 7 of 10 Jane Doe No. 7 v. Epstein Page 7 7. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 8. As to Plaintiff's claims for punitive damages in Count I — "Sexual Assault & Battery," and Count II — "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," such claims are subject to the limitations as set forth in §768.72, et seq., Florida Statutes. 9. As to Plaintiff's claims for punitive damages in Count I — "Sexual Assault & Battery," and Count II — "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," such claims are subject to the constitutional limitations and guideposts as set forth in BMW of North America v. Gore, 116 S.Ct 1589 (1996); Philip Morris USA v. Williams, 127 S.Ct. 1057 (2007); State Farm v. Campbell, 123 S.Ct 1513 (2003); Engle v. Liqoet Group, Inc., 945 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 2006). The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Florida's Constitution, Art. I, §§2 and 9, prohibit the imposition of grossly excessive or arbitrary punishments 10.As to Plaintiff's claims for punitive damages in Count I — "Sexual Assault & Battery," and Count II — "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress," the determination of whether or not Defendant is liable for punitive damages Is required to be bifurcated from a determination of the amount to be imposed. 11. Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action for sexual assault and/or battery under Count I. 12. As to Count III, Plaintiff has failed to plead a cause of action as she does not and can not show a violation of a predicate act under 18 U.S.C. §2255 (2005). EFTA00175234 Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 86 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/10/2009 Page 9 of 10 Jane Doe No. 7 v. Epstein Page 9 applying a novel construction of a criminal statute to conduct that neither the statute nor any prior judicial decision has fairly disclosed to be within its scope. 16.The applicable version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 creates a cause of action on behalf of a "minor." Plaintiff had attained the age of majority at the time of filing this action, and accordingly, her cause of action is barred. 17.Because Plaintiff has no claim under 18 U.S.C. §2255, this Court is without subject matter jurisdiction as to all claims asserted. 18.Application of the 18 U.S.C. §2255, as amended, effective July 27, 2006, is in violation of the constitutional principles of due process, the "Ex Post Facto" clause, and the Rule of Lenity, in that in amending the term "minor" to "person" as to those who may bring a cause of action impermissibly and unconstitutionally broadened the scope of persons able to bring a §2255 claim. 19. 18 U.S.C. §2255 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 141h Amendment under the U.S. Constitution, and thus Plaintiff's claim thereunder is barred. 20. 18 U.S.C. §2255 violates the constitutional guarantees of procedural and substantive due process. Procedural due process guarantees that a person will not be deprived of life, liberty or property without notice and opportunity to be heard. Substantive due process protects fundamental rights. Accordingly, Plaintiffs cause of action thereunder is barred. WHEREFORE Defendant requests that this Court deny the lief sought by Plaintiff. Robert D. I ritton, Jr. Attorney f r Defendant Epstein EFTA00175235 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2009 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No.: 08-CIV-80893 - MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. / PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue Plaintiff, Jane Doe, hereby brings this First Amended Complaint against Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and states as follows: 1. This is an action for damages in an amount in excess of $50,000,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs. 2. This First Amended Complaint is brought under a fictitious name in order to protect the identity of Plaintiff, Jane Doe, because this Complaint makes allegations of sexual assault and child abuse of a then minor. 3. At all times material to this cause of action, Plaintiff, Jane Doe, was a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida. 4. At all times material to this cause of action, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, was a resident of the State of New York. 5. At all times material to this cause of action, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, had a residence located in Palm Beach County, Florida. EFTA00175236 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2009 Page 3 of 18 12. Plaintiff Jane Doe was contacted by Defendant Jeffrey Epstein himself or or other unknown employees or assistants of Defendant Epstein on numerous occasions, and she was often times brought to Defendant Epstein's residence with the assistance of Defendant Epstein's assistants. 13. or other employees/assistants of Defendant Epstein would often arrange with the Yellow Cab cab company to take minor girls, including Jane Doe, to Defendant Epstein's house. 14. Once the then minor girl, including Plaintiff Jane Doe, arrived at Epstein's house, the assistants and employees left the then minor Plaintiff and other minor girls alone in a room at the defendant's mansion. Subsequently, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, himself would appear, remove his clothing, and direct the then minor Plaintiff to remove her clothing. He would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious, and sexual acts, including, but not limited to, of the then minor Plaintiffs sexual organs, using on the then minor Plaintiff, and the then minor Plaintiff. 15. Defendant Epstein traveled to his mansion in Palm Beach for the purpose of luring minor girls to his mansion to sexually abuse or batter them; he used the telephone to contact these minor girls for the purpose of coercing them into acts of prostitution and to enable himself to commit sexual battery against them and acts of lewdness in their presence, and he conspired with others, including his assistants and to further commit these acts and to avoid police detection. 3 EFTA00175237 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2009 Page 5 of 18 Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, at all times material to this cause of action, knew and should have known of the plaintiff, Jane Doe's minority. 21. The above-described acts were perpetrated upon the person of the then minor Plaintiff regularly and on dozens of occasions. 22. In June 2008, in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County, Florida, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, entered pleas of "guilty" to various Florida state crimes involving the solicitation of minors for prostitution and the procurement of minors for the purposes of prostitution, for which Defendant Epstein was sentenced to 18 months incarceration in Palm Beach County jail to be followed by 12 months community control (house arrest). COUNT I Sexual Battery upon a Minor 23. The Plaintiff, Jane Doe, repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 21 above. 24. On numerous occasions, Defendant Epstein did in fact intentionally touch Plaintiff, Jane Doe, on her person against her will and/or without her legal consent. 25. Defendant Epstein battered her sexually, in that he touched her in intimate areas of her body and person in an offensive manner while she was a minor child, and therefore the touchings were without legal consent. 26. Defendant Epstein touched her in intimate areas of her body on dozens of occasions between approximately February 2003 and approximately June 2005. 27. The conduct described in this count constitutes battery against the person of the then minor Plaintiff. 5 EFTA00175238 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2009 Page 7 of 18 federal offenses, the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement with the Federal Government, wherein he acknowledged Plaintiff Jane Doe as a victim of certain criminal offenses he committed against Jane Doe. 32. The Plaintiff, Jane Doe, was in fact a victim of one or more offenses enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, and as such asserts a cause of action against the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, pursuant to this Section of the United States Code and the agreement between the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and the United States Government. 33. Specifically, Defendant Epstein: (a) knowingly conspired with others known and unknown to use a facility or means of interstate commerce to knowingly persuade, induce, or entice minor females, including Plaintiff Jane Doe, to engage in prostitution, in violation of title 18, United States Code, Section 2422(b). (b) knowingly and willfully conspired with others known (such as M ) and unknown to travel in interstate commerce for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct with minors, including Plaintiff Jane Doe, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2423(f), with minor females, in violation fo Title 18, United States Code, Section 2423(b); all in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2423(e); (c) used a facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce to knowingly persuade, induce, or entice minor females, including Plaintiff Jane Doe, to engage in prostitution; in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2422(b); 7 EFTA00175239 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2009 Page 9 of 18 COUNT III Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 35. Plaintiff, Jane Doe, adopts and realleges paragraphs 1 through 22 above. 36. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's inappropriate sexual conduct towards the then minor Plaintiff was extreme and outrageous; under the circumstances, his conduct was outrageous and so extreme in degree that it should not be tolerated in a civilized community. 37. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein acted with the intent to cause severe emotional distress or with reckless disregard of the high probability of causing severe emotional distress upon the then minor Plaintiff. 38. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein was well aware that Plaintiff was a minor child, and yet he continued to sexually abuse her, intentionally and recklessly causing Plaintiff to suffer extreme emotional distress. 39. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's intentional, deliberate and reckless conduct caused severe emotional distress to the Plaintiff, Jane Doe. Defendant, at the time he committed these numerous sexual assaults on Plaintiff, Jane Doe, had a specific intent to harm the then minor Plaintiff, and his conduct did so harm the Plaintiff. 40. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's intentional and reckless conduct, Plaintiff, Jane Doe, has in the past suffered and in the future will continue to suffer severe emotional distress, physical injury, pain and suffering, psychological trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy and other damages associated with Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, controlling, manipulating and coercing her into a perverse and 9 EFTA00175240 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2009 Page 11 of 18 violation of Florida Statutes §772.103(3)-(4), as further outlined in detail in the RICO statement filed with this court. 44. This enterprise was separate and distinct from Epstein himself and had a definite hierarchical structure. Epstein served informally but effectively as the leader, C.E.O, or "boss" of this organization, directing his underlings how to recruit and procure young girls for his sexual activities and when to bring the girls to his mansion. Epstein's key "lieutenant" in the organization was MI who served as both his scheduler and a recruiter/procurer of the girls. Marcinkova also served as a recruiter and helped Epstein satisfy his criminal sexual desires by, on occasion, directly participating in sexual abuse and prostitution of the minor girls. Epstein also used otherwise-legitimate business activities to help further the purpose of the criminal enterprise. These apparently legitimate activities provided "cover" for Epstein and his associates to commit the crimes. Epstein and his associates maintained the appearance of running an upstanding investment business, as well as other legitimate businesses with connections to modeling agencies and other powerful business and political people, to discourage the minor girls from reporting the abuse to law enforcement. 45. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein participated in this enterprise through a pattern of criminal activity in that he engaged in at least two incidents of criminal activity, as defined in Florida Statute 772.102 and as described below, that have the same or similar intents, results, accomplices, victims, or methods of commission and are not isolated incidents. 46. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein engaged in criminal activity by committing, attempting to commit, conspiring to commit or soliciting, coercing or intimidating another 11 EFTA00175241 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2009 Page 13 of 18 47. The criminal acts of Defendant Epstein occurred repeatedly over a substantial period of time and were not isolated events. 48. Under Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's plan, scheme, and enterprise, Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, paid employees and underlings, including but not limited to to bring him minor girls to his Palm Beach mansion in order for the Defendant to solicit, induce, coerce, entice, compel or force such girls to engage in acts of prostitution and sexual misconduct with Defendant Epstein and sometimes , and to otherwise commit acts of sexual battery thereon. 49. Plaintiff, Jane Doe, was the victim of Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's plan, scheme, and enterprise and was so injured by reason of his violations of the provisions of s. 772.104. Plaintiff, Jane Doe, was called on the telephone by Defendant Epstein and other employees of his, including and transported to the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's residence, where she was placed in a room along with the Defendant, enticed to commit acts of prostitution, and had acts of sexual battery and sexual exploitation committed against her. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, conspired with his assistants and employees in order to accomplish their common motive or intent of seeking out, gaining access to, and exploiting minor children such as the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, in the aforementioned ways, and he further conspired with his employees, assistants and underlings to ensure that the crimes of this criminal enterprise were concealed or undetected by law enforcement. 50. After law enforcement began to detect the criminal activities of Defendant Epstein and the other persons involved in the criminal enterprise, the enterprise used resources and information to conceal the illegal activities of the enterprise, threaten the 13 EFTA00175242 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2009 Page 15 of 18 COUNT V Cause of Action Pursuant to Florida Statute 796.09 Against Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein 54. Plaintiff adopts and realleges paragraphs 1 through 22 above. 55. The allegations contained herein in Count II are a separate and distinct legal remedy. 56. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, was a wealthy and powerful man, and Plaintiff was an economically disadvantaged and impressionable minor. 57. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, used his vast wealth and power to coerce Plaintiff into prostitution and/or coerced her to remain in prostitution. 58. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, coerced Plaintiff into prostitution in one or more of the following ways: A. Domination of her mind and body through exploitive techniques; B. Inducement; C. Promise of greater financial rewards; D. Exploitation of a condition of developmental disability, cognitive limitation, affective disorder, and/or substance dependency; E. Exploitation of human needs for food, shelter or affection; F. Exploitation of underprivileged and vulnerable economic condition or situation; G. Use of a system of recruiting other similarly situated minor girls to further coerce and induce Plaintiff into the lifestyle of prostitution; and 15 EFTA00175243 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2009 Page 17 of 18 Respectfully Submitted, Plaintiff, by One of Her Counsel, s/ Bradley J. Edwards Bradley J. Edwards ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone Facsimile Florida Bar 'o.: E-mail: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on April 17, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing is being served this day upon all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. s/ Bradley J. Edwards Bradley J. Edwards 17 EFTA00175244 Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/07/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA JANE DOE NO. 7, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. MOTION TO COMPEL AND/OR IDENTIFY JANE DOE #7 IN THE STYLE OF THIS CASE AND MOTION TO IDENTIFY JANE DOE IN THIRD-PARTY SUBPOENAS FOR PURPOSES OF DISCOVERY, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO DISMISS SUA SPONTE, WITH INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAWI Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein" or "Defendant"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby requests that this Court enter an order identifying in the style of this case the complete legal name of the Plaintiff, JANE DOE #7 ("JANE DOE"), to substitute her complete legal name in this case in place of "JANE DOE" and, equally Important, allowing Defendant to identify her in various subpoenas that Epstein must serve so Epstein can defend this case or, alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Entire Action Sua Sponte. In support, Mr. Epstein states as follows: 1 Several of the discovery responses attached to this Motion and to the companion "Motions to Identify" filed in other related matters are markedly different. Therefore, each requires the court's attention on an individual basis. 1 EFTA00175245 Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/07/2009 Page 3 of 12 Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422, plaintiff claims entitlement to recover for ". . .personal injury, including mental, psychological and emotional damages" ¶33, Am. Comp., DE 19. See also Exhibit "A", Interrogatory Response Number 9. Plaintiff also claims entitlement to "punitive damages" and "actual and compensatory damages." DE 19. 6. Epstein has a constitutional due process right to defend himself and to seek the production of information that will assist in his defense of the allegations in the Amended Complaint. In this case, Plaintiffs counsel objected to Epstein serving subpoenas on Plaintiff's treating physicians and other third parties. Thus, this motion seeks to identify JANE DOE in the style of this case, to identify JANE DOE in various third-party subpoenas for discovery purposes and, alternatively, to dismiss this entire action sua sponte. The undersigned's experience in "Jane Doe" lawsuits is that once a Plaintiff is identified, other individuals come forward in the discovery phase with information which often directly contradicts allegations as to the events and damages. For instance, witnesses may testify that Plaintiff was paid by others for similar sexual acts she claims Mr. Epstein forced upon her or that she willingly participated in certain act(s) that would negate or lessen her damages. This goes directly to Plaintiff's damage claim. 7. Likewise, subpoenas must be issued to third-party treaters and current and former employers, and those subpoenas will seek to obtain records related directly to Plaintiff's claims and her damages (i.e., her claim for severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional 3 EFTA00175246 Cse 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/07/2009 Page 5 of 12 is not the case when a Plaintiff places her mental, emotional, psychological and physical condition at issue. 9. Moreover, when an order from the court is attached to the Subpoena, treaters and other third parties produce the records and show up to the depositions with the records requested because the deponent knows what to bring by virtue of knowing the identity of the Plaintiff. 10. Epstein's counsel intends to serve and depose witnesses duces tecum. If Epstein is not permitted to identify JANE DOE, how will any deponent know who the parties are and what to bring to the deposition pursuant to the duces tecum? Further, how will Epstein be able to defend the claims. Just like the Plaintiff, Epstein is entitled to due process. 11. While it is within the sound discretion of this court to allow a party to proceed anonymously, Plaintiff should not attempt to utilize that discretion as a shield from legitimate and necessary discovery. Epstein has a fundamental due process right to conduct discovery. b. Motion To Identify JANE DOE In Style Of This Case 12. As discussed below, Epstein has fundamental due process right to defend himself in this civil litigation. While JANE DOE travels under a pseudonym, various newspaper articles identifying Epstein have been released discussing the alleged claims against him. Allowing JANE DOE to litigate this matter under a pseudonym is preventing Epstein from defending this suit including, but not limited to, preventing him from locating individuals that may have information about this lawsuit and information about JANE DOE that may 5 EFTA00175247 Ca 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/07/2009 Page 7 of 12 Doe v. Frank, 951 F.2d at 323. Plaintiff does not fall under any of the factors. Moreover, even if she did meet one of the factors, "[t]he fact that [a] Doe [Plaintiff] may suffer some personal embarrassment, standing alone, does not require the granting of a request to proceed under a pseudonym." Id; see also Doe v, Rostker, 89 F.R.D. 159 (N.D. Calif. 1981). Any substantial privacy interests JANE DOE has must outweigh the customary and constitutionally embedded presumption of openness to judicial proceedings. Doe v. Frank, 951 F.2d at 323; Poe v. Bergstron, 2009 WL 528623 (C.A.9(Or.))(denying request to proceed anonymously in civil action by Plaintiff where Plaintiffs arrest, prosecution and acquittal were matters of public record). 14. In Sweetland v. State, 535 So.2d 646 (Fla. 18t DCA 1988), the court reasoned that the purpose of discovery is to eliminate the likelihood of surprise and to insure a fair opportunity to prepare for trial. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(1); see also Surf Drugs. Inc., v. Vermette, 236 So.2d 108, 111 (Fla. 1970)(stating that the rules of discovery should be afforded broad and liberal treatment to effectuate their purpose), citing., Hickman v. Taylor 329 U.S. 495, 501, 507 (1947). 15. Next, the right to go to court to resolve disputes is a fundamental right. D.R. Lakes, Inc. v. Brandsmart U.S.A. of West Palm Beach, 819 So.2d 971 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). All litigants are afforded an equal opportunity. Lingle v. Dion, 776 So.2d 1073 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). The Florida Constitution establishes the right commonly known as access to courts. Mitchell v. Moore, 786 So.2d 521 (Fla. 7 EFTA00175248 6se 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/07/2009 Page 9 of 12 others, diminished sense of future prospects, corruption of morals, distorted and disrupted development, loss of normal adolescent ideals." (Emphasis Added). W. Epstein is also entitled to know, among other things, whether she had any physical complaints or whether there was ever any evidence of physical battery on JANE DOE's body from the acts she complains of in the Amended Complaint. The need to serve third-party subpoenas on medical doctors is a basic discovery need related to the claims alleged by JANE DOE for which Plaintiff's counsel refuses to compromise. Balas v. Ruzzo 703 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), rev. denied, 719 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1998)(discoverability of Plaintiff's history of sexual activity is relevant to damages); United States v. Bear Stops 997 F.2d 451 (81h Cir. 1993)(deals with "admissibility of other acts of sexual abuse by individuals other than the defendant to explain why a victim of abuse exhibited behavioral manifestations of a sexually abused child.") If Plaintiff saw a psychologist or other physician during or after the time periods she claims she was assaulted by Epstein but either did not discuss or did discuss the incidents (or lack thereof) would be directly relevant to her damage claims. Plaintiff seeks physical and emotional/mental personal injury type damages, and the Epstein must conduct his own discovery thereon. See supra. No valid discovery objections or exemptions exist preventing necessary and reasonable discovery. To hold otherwise prevents Mr. Epstein from preparing and defending this matter. 19. In defending this lawsuit, Mr. Epstein should be permitted broad discovery, whether admissible at trial or not. Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 26 provides, in pertinent part, that "parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not 9 EFTA00175249 Case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/07/2009 Page 11 of 12 would ultimately result in reversible error at any trial. II. Conclusion 22. Epstein requests the following relief: a. That JANE DOE be identified by her legal name in the style of this case; b. That Epstein be granted leave to identify JANE DOE by her legal name In Third-Party Subpoenas (but not file them in Court or, if required, in a redacted form); and c. That, on an alternative basis, this court dismiss this action Sua Sponte until such time as JANE DOE Identifies herself in the style of this matter. Doe v. Rostker, 89 F.R.D.at 163. WHEREFORE, Epstein, Jeffrey Epstein, respectfully requests that this Court enter said order granting the relief requested above, and for such other and further relief as this Court may deem jus By: ROBERT CRI TON, JR., ESQ. Certificate of Service I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of gal , 2009: Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 60 Fax: ssmasexa useattornev.com EFTA00175250 CM/ECF, Live Database - flsd Page 1 of 14 LRJ, MEDREQ, REF_DISCOV U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (West Palm Beach) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 9:08-cv-80993-KAM Jane Doe No. 7 v. Epstein Assigned to: Judge Kenneth A. Marra Referred to: Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson Lead case: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Member case: (View Member Case) Case: 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Cause: 28:1391 Personal Injury Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 7 Date Filed: 09/10/2008 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 710 Labor: Fair Standards Jurisdiction: Federal Question represented by Adam 1). Horowitz Mermelstein & Horowitz PA 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami FL 33160 Fax: Email: LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Jeffrey Marc Herman Herman & Mermelstein 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami FL 33160 Fax: 931-0877 Email: jherman@hermanlaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stuart S. Mermelstein Mermelstein & Horowitz PA 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 https://eculsd.useourts.govicgi-bin/D1ctRpt.pl?667278296697325-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175251 ONECF Live Database - flsd Page 2 of 14 Miami FL 33160 V. Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Fax: 931-0877 Email: LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Robert Deweese Critton , Jr. Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman 515 N Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach , FL 33401-2918 Amiens United States of America represented by Fax: Email: LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael James Pike Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman 515 N Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach , FL 33401-2918 Fax: 51 -3148 Email: ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED United States Attorney's Office 500 East Broward Blvd 7th Floor derdale , FL 33394 , ext. 3546 Fax: 356-7336 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED https://ectflsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pr667278296697325-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175252 CWECF, Live Database - flsd Page 3 of 14 Date Filed # that Docket Text 09/10/2008 1 F. 463.9 KB COMPLAINT against Jeffrey Epstein Filing fee $ 350.00. Receipt#: 544158, filed by Jane Doe No. 7.(vt) (Entered: 09/10/2008) 09/10/2008 2 r 99.1 KB Summons Issued as to Jeffrey Epstein. (vt) (Entered: 09/10/2008) 09/15/2008 3 r 130.8 KB NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Robert Deweese Critton, Jr on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein (Critton, Robert) (Entered: 09/15/2008) 10/03/2008 4 r 82.8 KB ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE Executed as to 2 Summons Issued, 1 Complaint Acknowledgement filed by Jane Doe No. 7. (Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 10/03/2008) 10/03/2008 5 fi 26.1 Ica NOTICE of Striking 4 Acknowledgment of Service filed by Jane Doe No. 7 by Jane Doe No. 7 (Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 10/03/2008) 10/03/2008 6 r 82.8 KB SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed by Jane Doe No. 7. Jeffrey Epstein served on 9/23/2008, answer due 10/14/2008. (Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 10/03/2008) 10/14/2008 7 r 1.1 MB Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss 1 Complaint, MOTION for More Definite Statement by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 10/31/2008 (Critton, Robert) (Entered: 10/14/2008) 10/20/2008 8 r 46.3 KB ORDER OF TRANSFER. Case is transferred to Judge Kenneth A. Marra for all further proceedings. Judge Daniel T. K. Hurley no longer assigned to case. Signed by Judge Daniel T. K. Hurley on 10/17/2008 and Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 10/17/2008. (jdo) (Entered: 10/20/2008) 10/21/2008 9 r 33,9 KB CERTIFICATION AND ORDER OF TRANSFER TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Case Transferred to Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson as referral judge in case. Magistrate Judge James M. Hopkins no longer assigned as referral judge(s) in case. Signed by Magistrate Judge James M. Hopkins on 10/21/08. (Iwl) (Entered: 10/21/2008) 10/21/2008 Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson added per Order at DE 9 . (bb) (Entered: 10/28/2008) 10/22/2008 io r 63.6 KB Order Requiring Counsel to Confer and File Joint Scheduling Report. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 10/21/2008. (ir) (Entered: 10/22/2008) 10/31/2008 II r 161.5 KB MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 7 Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss 1 Complaint MOTION for More Definite Statement filed by Jane Doe No. 7. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 10/31/2008) 11/10/2008 12 r RESPONSE/REPLY to 11 Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?667278296697325-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175253 CMJECV- Live Database - flsd Page 4 of 14 290.8 1CB Motion to Dismiss filed by Jeffrey Epstein. (Critton, Robert) (Entered: 11/10/2008) 12/17/2008 13. r 2.1 JAB NOTICE of Filing Discovery: Joint Scheduling and Discovery Report by Jeffrey Epstein.(Pike, Michael) (Entered: 12/17/2008) 12/17/2008 15 JOINT SCHEDULING REPORT - Rule 16.1. See image DE 13 (1k) (Entered: 12/18/2008) 12/18/2008 14 r 82.5 " SCHEDULING ORDER: Jury Trial set for 2/8/2010 09:00 AM in West Palm Beach Division before Judge Kenneth A. Marra., Calendar Call set for 2/5/2010 10:00 AM in West Palm Beach Division before Judge Kenneth A. Main., Amended Pleadings due by 2/2/2009., Discovery due by 10/5/2009., Dispositive Motions due by 10/23/2009. ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson for Discovery Proceedings, ORDER REFERRING CASE to Mediation. 15 days to appoint mediator. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 12/17/2008. (ir) (Entered: 12/18/2008) 12/18/2008 16 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 13 Notice of Filing Discovery filed by Jeffrey Epstein. ERROR - Wrong Event Selected; Correction - Redocketed by Clerk as Scheduling Report-Rule 26 (f) B . Instruction to Filer - In the future, please select the proper event. It is not necessary to refile this document. (1k) (Entered: 12/18/2008) 02/12/2009 17 r tom KB OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 1 Motion to Dismiss; denying 7 Motion for More Definite Statement. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 2/12/2009. (ir) (Entered: 02/12/2009) 02/23/2009 18 r 21.1 KB NOTICE by Jane Doe No. 7 of Change of Name of Plaintiffs Counsel (Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 02/23/2009) 02/27/2009 19 r 35.8 KB AMENDED COMPLAINT, filed by Jane Doe No. 7.(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 02/27/2009) 03/04/2009 20 r 376.1 KB Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 12 Amended Complaint with proposed Order by Jeffrey Epstein. (Critton, Robert) (Entered: 03/04/2009) 03/05/2009 21 ENDORSED ORDER granting 20 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint. Jeffrey Epstein response due 4/3/2009. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 3/5/2009. (ir) (Entered: 03/05/2009) 03/25/2009, 22 r 2.2 MB Defendant's MOTION to Stay re 19 Amended Complaint by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 4/13/2009 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Pike, Michael) (Entered: 03/25/2009) 03/27/2009 23 MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, https://eculsd.uscourts.govicgi-bitilDktRpt.p17667278296697325-L_801_0-11 6/10/2009 EFTA00175254 CIWECF r Live Database - flsd Page 5 of 14 r 435.3 KB and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support by Jane Doe No. 7. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 03/27/2009) 03/27/2009 24 MOTION to Consolidate Cases for purposes of discovery ( Responses due by 4/13/2009), MOTION to Quash by Jane Doe No. 7. See image DE 23 (1k) (Entered: 03/30/2009) 03/30/2009 25 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 23 MOTION for Protective Order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support filed by Jane Doe No. 7. ERROR - Motion with Multiple Reliefs flied as One Relief; Correction - Additional relief(s) 24 MOTION TO QUASH AND MOTION CONSOLIDATE CASES docketed by Clerk. Instruction to filer - In the future, please select all applicable reliefs. It is not necessary to refile this document. (1k) (Entered: 03/30/2009) 04/02/2009 26 r 2.4 "s Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to 1st RTP by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 4/20/2009 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Critton, Robert) (Entered: 04/02/2009) 04/02/2009 27 r 2.0 MB Defendant's MOTION to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogs by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 4/20/2009 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit CXCritton, Robert) (Entered: 04/02/2009) 04/02/2009 28 r 36" ics Defendant's ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Amended Complaint (Second) by Jeffrey Epstein.(Critton, Robert) (Entered: 04/02/2009) 04/06/2009 29 r 140.5 KB Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 24 MOTION to Consolidate Cases MOTION to Quash, 21 MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 04/06/2009) 04/07/2009 30 ENDORSED ORDER granting 29 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re 24 MOTION to Consolidate Cases MOTION to Quash, 23 MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support. Responses due by 4/13/2009. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 4/7/2009. (ir) (Entered: 04/07/2009) 04/10/2009 31 r 137 KB 4 Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 30 Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer, 23 MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support (Amended) by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 04/10/2009) https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?667278296697325-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175255 CM/ECF,- Live Database - flsd Page 6 of 14 04/13/2009 32 ENDORSED ORDER granting (73) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (66 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support in case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM; granting (65) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (66 in 9:08-cv-80119- KAM) MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support in case 9:08- cv-80232-ICAM; granting (80) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (66 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support in case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM; granting (31) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (66 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support in case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM in case 9:08- cv-80119-KAM. Responses due by 4/16/2009. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 4/13/2009. (ir) (Entered: 04/13/2009) 04/13/2009 33 r 41.6 KB Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response /Memorandum in Opposition to Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action by Jane Doe No. 7. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order) (Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/13/2009) 04/14/2009 34 ENDORSED ORDER granting (75) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM; granting (67) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv- 80232-KAM; granting (82) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM; granting (73) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendants MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv- 80381-KAM; granting (33) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM; granting (27) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv- 80994-KAM in case 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM. ( Responses due by 4/23/2009). Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 4/14/2009. (ir) (Entered: 04/14/2009) 04/16/2009 35 Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 23 MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of https://ectflsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?667278296697325-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175256 CWECF Live Database - flsd Page 7 of 14 r 138.8 KB Jane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes olDiscovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) Modified on 4/20/2009 (Is). (Entered: 04/16/2009) 04/17/2009 36 ENDORSED ORDER granting (77) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (66 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support in case 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM; granting (84) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (66 in 9:08-cv-80119- KAM) MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support in case 9:08- cv-80380-KAM; granting (35) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (66 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 3, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support in case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM in case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM. ( Responses due by 4/24/2009). Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 4/17/2009. (ir) (Entered: 04/17/2009) 04/17/2009 37 n 339.6 KB RESPONSE to Motion re 23 MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support filed by Jeffrey Epstein. Replies due by 4/27/2009. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 04/17/2009) 04/17/2009 38 r 42.2 KB Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 27 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogs, 26 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to 1st RTP by Jane Doe No. 7. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/17/2009) 04/23/2009 39 r 43.6 KB RESPONSE in Opposition re 22 Defendant's MOTION to Stay re 19 Amended Complaint filed by Jane Doe No. 7. (Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/23/2009) 04/27/2009 40 r 50.3 ica ORDER Granting 38 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Memorandum in Opposition to 27 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogatories, 26 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to First Request to Produce. Response due by 4/29/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson on 4/27/2009. (sa) (Entered: 04/27/2009) 04/27/2009 41 r 3j.j: MEMORANDUM in Support re 23 MOTION for Protective Order and to Quash Subpoena for Deposition of Jane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support by Jane Doe No. 7. (Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/27/2009) https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.govicgi-bin/DIctRpt.p17667278296697325-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175257 CIVWECF Live Database - flsd Page 8 of 14 04/29/2009 42 r 60.2 KB ORDER granting 23 Motion for Protective Order and Consolidating Cases For Purposes of Discovery. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 4/28/2009. (cqs) (Entered: 04/29/2009) 04/29/2009 43 r 42.3 KB Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 27 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Answers to 1st lnterrogs, 26 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to 1st RTP by Jane Doe No. 7. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/29/2009) 05/04/2009 44 r 278.6 KB MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 42 Order on Motion for Protective Order by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/04/2009) 05/05/2009 45 r 261.1 KB RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/05/2009) 05/05/2009 46 r sts KB Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Reply as to 39 Response in Opposition to Motion to Stay by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/05/2009) 05/05/2009 48 MOTION for clarification 42 Order on Motion for Protective Order by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 5/22/2009. See image DE 45 (1k) (Entered: 05/06/2009) 05/06/2009 47 ENDORSED ORDER granting (89) Motion for Extension of Time to Reply re (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint; granting (81) Motion for Extension of Time to Reply re (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM; granting (97) Motion for Extension of Time to Reply re (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv-80380- KAM; granting (82) Motion for Extension of Time to Reply re (65 in 9:08- cv-80119-ICAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv-80381-KAM; granting (46) Motion for Extension of Time to Reply re (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv-80993- KAM; granting (37) Motion for Extension of Time to Reply re (65 in 9:08- cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv-80994-KAM in case 9:08-ov-80119-KAM. ( Replies due by 5/20/2009.). Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/5/2009. (ir) (Entered: 05/06/2009) 05/06/2009 49 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 45 Response to Order to Show Cause filed by Jeffrey Epstein. ERROR - Two or More Document Events Filed as One; Correction - Additional event(s) 48 MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION docketed by Clerk. Instruction to Filer - In the future, please select all applicable events. It is not necessary to refile https://ecf.flsd.useourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17667278296697325-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175258 CM/ECF Live Database - flsd Page 9 of 14 this document. (1k) (Entered: 05/06/2009) 05/06/2009 50 r 37.2 KB RESPONSE in Opposition re 27 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogs and for an Award of Reasonable Expenses filed by Jane Doe No. 7. (Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 05/06/2009) 05/06/2009 51 r 340A KB RESPONSE in Opposition re 26 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to 1st RTP , Overrule Objections and for an Award of Reasonable Expenses filed by Jane Doe No. 7. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 05/06/2009) 05/07/2009 52 r 84B 0.8 Defendant's MOTION to Compel and/or Identift Doe #7 in the Style of this Case and in Third-Party Subpoenas by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 5/26/2009 (Attachments: # .1_ Exhibit A)(Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/07/2009) 05/07/2009 53 Alternative MOTION to Dismiss 1 Complaint by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 5/26/2009. See image DE 52 (1k) (Entered: 05/08/2009) 05/08/2009 54 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 52 Defendant's MOTION to Compel and/or Identifr Doe #7 in the Style of this Case and in Third-Party Subpoenas filed by Jeffrey Epstein. ERROR - Motion with Multiple Reliefs Filed as One Relief; Correction - Additional relief(s) 53 MOTION TO DISMISS docketed by Clerk. Instruction to filer - In the future, please select all applicable reliefs. It is not necessary to refile this document. (1k) (Entered: 05/08/2009) 05/11/2009 55 r 203.0 KB Defendant's MOTION Require Plaintiff to Use Proper Case Style by Jeffrey Epstein. (Critton, Robert) (Entered: 05/11/2009) 05/13/2009 56 r 400.3 M3 RESPONSE/REPLY to 39 Response in Opposition to Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2009) 05/14/2009 Cases associated. (dg) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/14/2009 57 r 1°63 Ica ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES. Hereinafter all motions and other court filings that relate to discovery and all procedural motions that relate to multiple cases shall be styled with all of the case names and numbers and shall be filed in Case No. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/14/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM et al. (ir) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/14/2009 58 F :43 ORDER REQUESTING UNITED STATES PROVIDE POSITION TO MOTION TO STAY. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/14/2009. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Motion to Stay DE 51) Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. (ir) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/14/2009 59 ORDER denying as moot 48 Motion for Clarification; denying as moot 55 https://ectflsd.uscourts.gov/egi-bin/DIctRpt.pl?667278296697325-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175259 C14/ECF, Live Database - flsd Page 10 of 14 Motion ; denying as moot 24 Motion to Consolidate Cases; denying as moot 24 Motion to Quash. See Order consolidating cases.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/14/2009. (Ic3) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/14/2009 60 ORDER terminating 52 Motion to Compel; terminating 53 Motion to Dismiss; terminating 22 Motion to Stay. See Order consolidating cases. See procedural motions pending: DE 65 and DE 91 in 08-80119.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/14/2009. (1c3) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/18/2009 61 r 174.3 KB Defendants MOTION for Extension of Time to File Reply as to (39 in 9:08-cv-80994-KAM) Response in Opposition to Motion, (40 in 9:08-cv- 80994-KAM) Response in Opposition to Motion by Jeffrey Epstein. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al.(Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/18/2009) 05/19/2009 62 r MB 0.8 Defendant's MOTION to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 6/8/2009 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A) Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al.(Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/19/2009) 05/20/2009 63 ORDER terminating (93) Motion to Strike ; terminating (94) Motion in case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM; terminating (110) Motion to Strike ; terminating (111) Motion in case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM; terminating (95) Motion to Strike ; terminating (96) Motion in case 9:08-cv-80381-KAM; terminating (90) Motion to Strike ; terminating (91) Motion in case 9:08-cv-80811- KAM; terminating (62) Motion to Strike in case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM; terminating (62) Motion to Strike in case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM; terminating (50) Motion to Strike in case 9:08-cv-80994-KAM. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/20/2009. (1c3) (Entered: 05/20/2009) 05/20/2009 64 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 62 MOTION to Strike filed by Jeffrey Epstein. Error - Motion with Multiple Reliefs Filed as One Relief;. Instruction to filer - In the future, please select all applicable reliefs. It is not necessary to refile this document. (Is) (Entered: 05/20/2009) 05/20/2009 65 r 363.1 KB NOTICE by to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Comp gi Or Ident Identify . of Filing Withdrawal of Previously Raised Oils in the Style of This Case and Motion to Identifri=. in Third-Party Subpoenas for Purposes of Discovery, Or, Alternatively, Motion to Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Inorporated Memorandum of Law Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al.(Hill, Jack) (Entered: 05/20/2009) 05/20/2009 66 ORDER S G in all Epstein cases EXCEPT case no. 08-80119: Notice by of Filing Withdrawal of Previously Raised Objections 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) https://edflsd.uscourts.gov/egi-bin/DktRpt.pl?667278296697325-1.4_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175260 CM/ECF'. Live Database - flsd Page 11 of 14 (Entered: 05/20/2009) 05/21/2009 67 r 3KB 0.1 Plaintiffs MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to (91 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identity of Doe in Style of Case and Third-Party Subpoenas (replaces Docket entry 90) by Jane Doe No. 6, Jane Doe No. 7, Jane Doe, Jane Doe No. 5, Jane Doe No. 4, Jane Doe No. 3. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. (Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 05/21/2009) 05/22/2009 68 ORDER terminating (100) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond in case 9:08-cv-80232-ICAM; terminating (117) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond in case 9:08-cv-80380-KAM; terminating (101) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond in case 9:08-cv-80381-KAM; terminating (67) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond in case 9:08-cv-80993- KAM; terminating (54) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond in case 9:08-cv-80994-KAM. The attorneys are instructed again to ONLY file this type of motion in case no. 08-80119. See Order consolidating cases for details.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/22/2009. (Ic3) (Entered: 05/22/2009) 05/22/2009 69 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 65 Notice (Other), Notice (Other) filed by .. Error - Incorrect Document Link/No Link;. Instruction to filer - In the future, please link the document to the proper entry. It is not necessary to refile this document. (Is) (Entered: 05/22/2009) 05/27/2009 70 r no KB NOTICE by Jane Doe re (111 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Plaintiffs MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to (91 in 9:08-cv- 80119-ICAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identity of Doe in Style of Case and Third-Party Subpoenas (replaces Docket entry 90)Plaintiffs MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to (91 in 9:08-cv- 80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identity of Doe in Style of Case and Third-Party Subpoenas (replaces Docket entry 90) (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. (Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 05/27/2009) 05/28/2009 71 ORDER STRIKING Notice by Jane Doe in all Epstein cases EXCEPT in case 08-80119. This Notice should only be filed in 08-80119, not in all of the Epstein cases... Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/28/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. (1c3) (Entered: 05/28/2009) 05/29/2009 72 r, 11.6 KB NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by on behalf of Ilgilssaiftuaf America Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. MM Me (Entered: 05/29/2009) , 05/29/2009 73 RESPONSE to Motion re (72 in 9:08-cv-80380-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (62) Amended Complaint, (57 in 9:08-cv-80232- KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (50) Amended Complaint, (24 in https://ectflsd.useourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRptpl?667278296697325-1,_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175261 CM/Eclz7 Live Database - flsd Page 12 of 14 r 373 KB 9:08-cv-80893-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (1) Complaint, (23 in 9:08-cv-80994-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (18) Amended Complaint, (22 in 9:08-cv-80993-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (19) Amended Complaint, (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint, (68 in 9:08-cv-80381- ICAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (60) Amended Complaint, (51 in 9:08-cv-80811-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (40) Amended Complaint and or Continue Action Filed Pursuant to Court's Order Requesting Government's Position filed by United States of America. t heAL6/8/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. MM) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05/29/2009 74 r 43.3 KB RESPONSE in Opposition re (90 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identify Doe in Style of Case and in Third-Party Subpoenas, (91 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identity of Doe in Style of Case and Third-Party Subpoenas (replaces Docket entry 90) filed by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al.(Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05/29/2009 75 ORDER STRIKING (124 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM, 105 in 9:08-cv-80811- KAM, 74 in 9:08-cv-80993-KAM, 72 in 9:08-cv-80893-KAM, 106 in 9:08- cv-80232-ICAM, 123 in 9:08-cv-80380-ICAM, 35 in 9:09-cv-80591-KAM, 25 in 9:09-cv-80469-ICAM, 60 in 9:08-cv-80994-KAM, 22 in 9:09-cv- 80656-KAM, 107 in 9:08-cv-80381-KAM) Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101 DO NOT FILE IN EVERY EPSTEIN CASE. SEE ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/29/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08- cv-80119-KAM et al. (1c3) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05/29/2009 76 r 24.5 KB MOTION for Leave to File UNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STAY OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO UNSEAL THE NONPROSECUTION AGREEMENT by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al.(Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05/29/2009 77 r, 19.5 KB MOTION for Hearing MOTION TO RESCHEDULE HEARING by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al.(Josefsberg, Robert) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 06/01/2009 78 ORDER STRIKING (28 in 9:09-cv-80469-KAM, 126 in 9:08-cv-80380- KAM, 109 in 9:08-cv-80232-KAM, 25 in 9:09-cv-80656-ICAM, 77 in 9:08- cv-80993-KAM, 38 in 9:09-cv-80591-ICAM, 110 in 9:08-cv-80381-KAM, 63 in 9:08-cv-80994-KAM, 75 in 9:08-cv-80893-KAM, 108 in 9:08-cv- 80811-KAM) Motion to Continue Hearing filed by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101, (76 in 9:08-cv-80993-KAM, 109 in 9:08-cv-80381-KAM, 108 in 9:08-cv-80232-KAM, 62 in 9:08-cv-80994-KAM, 125 in 9:08-cv- 80380-KAM, 74 in 9:08-cv-80893-KAM, 24 in 9:09-cv-80656-KAM, 37 in hrips://ecf.flsd.uscourts.goviegi-bin/DktRptpl?667278296697325-L 801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175262 CM/ECF Live Database - flsd Page 13 of 14 9:09-cv-80591-KAM, 107 in 9:08-cv-80811-KAM, 27 in 9:09-cv-80469- ICAM) Motion for Leave to File, filed by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101. THESE DOCUMENTS SHOULD BE FILED ONLY IN 08-80119. SEE CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 6/1/2009. (1c3) (Entered: 06/01/2009) 06/01/2009 Reset Scheduling Order Deadlines: Calendar Call set for 5/28/2010 10:00 AM in West Palm Beach Division before Judge Kenneth A. Marra., Jury Trial set for 6/1/2010 09:00 AM in West Palm Beach Division before Judge Kenneth A. Marra., Discovery due by 12/11/2009., Dispositive Motions due by 1/8/2010. (ir) (Entered: 06/01/2009) 06/04/2009 79 r 349.0 KB REPLY to Response to Motion re (113 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Plaintiffs MOTION Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe 102's Motion for No- Contact Order Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Reply to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Response to Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for a No-Contact Order filed by Jane Doe No. 101, Jane Doe No. 102. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. (Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 06/04/2009) 06/04/2009 80 ORDER STRIKING (112 in 9:08-cv-80381-KAM, 111 in 9:08-cv-80232- KAM, 136 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM, 111 in 9:08-cv-80811-KAM, 128 in 9:08-cv-80380-KAM, 65 in 9:08-cv-80994-ICAM, 79 in 9:08-cv-80893- KAM, 42 in 9:09-cv-80591-KAM, 27 in 9:09-cv-80656-KAM, 32 in 9:09- cv-80469-ICAM, 79 in 9:08-cv-80993-KAM) Reply to Response to Motion, filed by Jane Doe No. 102, Jane Doe No. 101 Document stricken for failure to follow Court's orders. DO NOT FILE A DOCUMENT IN EVERY EPSTEIN CASE if it is to be filed only in 08-80119. See Case Management Order and contact CM/ECF Support for assistance in proper filing.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 6/4/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119- ICAM et al. (1c3) (Entered: 06/04/2009) 06/08/2009 81 r 3.8 MB RESPONSE to Motion re (91 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identity of Doe in Style of Case and Third-Party Subpoenas (replaces Docket entry 90) filed by Jane Doe. Replies due by 6/18/2009. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM et al.(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 06/08/2009) 06/08/2009 82 r mil l NOTICE by Jane Doe re (113 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) Plaintiffs MOTION Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe 102's Motion for No- Contact Order -Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM et al.(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 06/08/2009) 06/09/2009 83 r Ma Unopposed MOTION to Amend/Correct 28 Answer to Amended Complaint by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 6/26/2009 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit "A", # 2 Exhibit "B", # 3 Text of Proposed Order OrderXPike, Michael) (Entered: 06/09/2009) https://ecf.flsd.useourts.gov/egi-bin/DktRpt.pl?667278296697325-L_801 0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175263 CWEC IF T Live Database - flsd Page 14 of 14 06/10/2009 84 ENDORSED ORDER granting 83 Motion to Amend affirmative defenses. Defendant must separately file affirmative defenses. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 6/9/2009. (ir) (Entered: 06/10/2009) 06/10/2009 85 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 82 Notice (Other), Notice (Other) filed by Jane Doe. Error - Wrong Event Selected;. Instruction to Filer - In the future, please select the proper event, i.e. Notice of Adoption. It is not necessary to refile this document. (Is) (Entered: 06/10/2009) 06/10/2009 86 r o.s MB AMENDED DOCUMENT by Jeffrey Epstein. Amendment to 19 Amended Complaint, 28 Answer to Amended Complaint. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 06/10/2009) or View Selected Download Selected Total filesize of selected documents (MB):1 Maximum filesize allowed (MB): 10 PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt 06/10/2009 14:04:28 PACER Login: du4480 Client Code: Description: Docket Report Search Criteria: 9:08-cv-809931 KAM Billable Pages: 9 Cost: 0.72 https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17667278296697325-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175264 Case'9:09-cv-80469-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/25/2009 RIPON 1 105 0.1 ELECTRONIC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Mar. 24, 2009 STEVEN m.LARim0RE CLERK N.S. DIST. CT. s.o. Or FLA.• MIAMI 09-80469-Civ-RYSKAMPNITUNAC JANE DOE II ) CASE NO.: ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) an P ) and ) ) Defendants. ) COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff, JANE DOE II, hereby sues JEFFREY EPSTEIN and and states: JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. This is an action for damages in excess of $75,000, exclusive of interests, costs and attorney's fees. 3. Venue is proper in this Court as all acts occurred in Palm Beach County and all parties reside and/or do business herein. PARTIES 4. Ms. DOE II is a natural person residing in Palm Beach County, Florida. During the events giving rise to this claim, she was a minor but has now reached majority. She files this suit under a pseudonym to protect her privacy because the acts alleged occurred while she was a minor. SCANNED I oil EFTA00175265 O9-.110: 199sLiwERYSKIA rtIRLIATE N A a .red on FLSD Docket 03/25/2009 Page 3 of 5 • 11. From about June, 2003 until on or about February, 2005, Defendants EPSTEIN anal persuaded, induced, or enticed the Plaintiff to come to Defendant EPSTEIN's home and provide Defendant EPSTEIN with "massages". which escalated into sexual encounters between Defendant EPSTEIN and the Plaintiff designed to fulfill his unnatural sexual desires for young women or even younger girls who were minors. These acts included Defendant EPSTEIN's request that he wanted the encounter to be like a "porn video." Defendant EPSTEIN would script lines for the Plaintiff to say, including calling out his name and requesting that he perform a certain sexual act "harder,"while he touched the Plaintiffs aor with alternately, he would min the presence of the Plaintiff after demanding her to disrobe and walk in front of him in provocative sexual poses. Defendant EPSTEIN would pay the Plaintiff a fee of $200 on each occasion after he while in the presence of the Plaintiff. 12. Defendant EPSTEIN touched Plaintiffs , or Plaintiffs on multiple occasions, during the time that Plaintiff was a minor, causing personal injury to her. 13. In violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422(b),Defendants EPSTEIN and knowingly persuaded, induced, or enticed the Plaintiff to engage in acts of prostitution, when the Plaintiff was under the age of 18, approximately on or about the following dates that Plaintiff can document based on payments received: 6/16/03, 7/2/03, 4/9/04, 6/7/04, 7/30/04, 8/30/04,10/9/04, 10/12/04, 10/30/04 and 11/9/04. In addition, Plaintiff believes that there were as many as 10 to 20 other occasions during this time frame that Defendant EPSTEIN solicited her and procured her to perform prostitution services, all during the time that she was a minor. 3 3 of EFTA00175266 09-80As69.aiMr-ROYSOAMPAY3MINAC Entered on FLSD Docket 03/25/200 FILEAN 51bP5 S. ELECTnoW ims 44 Mao. 204/ CIVIL COVER SHEET ThelS 44 civil coyeuheet and the information omnibus' herein neither resdne nor supplement the ft/Mgand service of pleadings or other papers by local mks of coon. This Ranh approved by the Judicial Conference of the UnitedSrates in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCT/OHS ON THE REVERSE OP THE reit NOTICE: Attorneys MUST Indicate All Re-filed I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS JANE DOE II (b) County of Residence of Fi