EFTA00175775.pdf

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 1 of 17 U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (West Palm Beach) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 9:08-cv-80380-KAM Doe No. 4'. Epstein Assigned to: Judge Kenneth A. Marra Referred to: Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson Lead case: 9:08-ev-80111-.KAM Member case• (View Member Case) Case: 9:09-0-80802-KAM Cause: 28:1332 Diversity Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 Date Filed: 04/14/2008 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 360 P.I.: Other Jurisdiction: Diversity represented by Adam D. 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: LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stuart S. Mermelstein Mermelstein & Horowitz PA 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami FL 33160 MOM Fax: 931-0877 Email: LRJ https://ecIfIsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175775 CWECF - Live Database - flsd Page 2 of 17 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant Jeffrey Epstein represented by Jeffrey Epstein 9 East 71st Street New York, NY 10021 PRO SE Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach , FL 33401-5012 Fax: 835-8691 Email: ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael James Pike Burman Critton Luther & Coleman 515 N Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-2918 Fax: 515-3148 Email: ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Michael Ross Tein Lewis Tein 3059 Grand Avenue Suite 340 Coconut Grove , FL 33133 Fax: 442-6744 Email: ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Robert Deweese Critton , Jr. Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman 515 N Flagler Drive Suite 400 West Palm Beach , FL 33401-2918 Fax: Email: ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED https://ect flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175776 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 3 of 17 Auto United States of America represented by. United States Attorney's Office 500 East Broward Blvd 7th Floor Ft Lauderdale , FL 33394 ext. 3546 Fax: 35111 1 Email: LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Date Filed # Docket Text 04/14/2008 1 COMPLAINT against Jeffrey Epstein Filing fee $ 350. Receipt#: 542769, filed by Jane Doe No. 4.(dj) (Entered: 04/14/2008) 04/14/2008 2 Summons Issued as to Jeffrey Epstein. (dj) (Entered: 04/14/2008) 04/17/2008 3 ORDER OF TRANSFER. Case reassigned to Judge Kenneth A. Marra for all further proceedings. Judge Daniel T. K. Hurley no longer assigned to caseSigned by Judge Daniel T. K. Hurley on 4/15/08.(ail) (Entered: 04/17/2008) 04/18/2008 4 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson. Magistrate Judge James M. Hopkins no longer assigned as referral judge in case.Signed by Magistrate Judge James M. Hopkins on 4/18/08.(lw) Modified on 4/23/2008 (1w). (Entered: 04/18/2008) 04/21/2008 5 Order Requiring Counsel to Confer and File Joint Scheduling Report.Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 4/18/08.(ir) (Entered: 04/21/2008) 05/22/2008 6 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Summons and Complaint served on Jeffrey Epstein on May 7, 2008, filed by Jane Doe No. 4. (Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 05/22/2008) 05/29/2008 7. Plaintiffs MOTION for Entry of Default by Clerk Against Defendant by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A and B, # 2 Text of Proposed Order Default OrderXHorowitz, Adam) (Entered: 05/29/2008) 06/02/2008 $ Clerks Entry of Default as to Jeffrey Epstein terminated 7 Motion for Entry of Default by Clerk (ail) (Entered: 06/02/2008) 06/05/2008 2 Plaintiffs MOTION for Judgment Upon Default and Order Setting Hearing on Damagers by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order) (Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 06/05/2008) 06/13/2008 1.0 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Jack Alan Goldberger on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein (Goldberger, Jack) (Entered: 06/13/2008) 06/13/2008 11 MOTION to Set Aside Default by Jeffrey Epstein. (Attachments: # I Affidavit https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175777 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 4 of 17 of Richard Bamett)(Goldberger, Jack) (Entered: 06/13/2008) 06/19/2008 12 RESPONSE in Opposition re 2 Plaintiffs MOTION for Judgment Upon Default and Order Setting Hearing on Damagers (DE #9) filed by Jeffrey Epstein. (Goldberger, Jack) (Entered: 06/19/2008) 06/20/2008 B Defendant's MOTION to Stay by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 7/10/2008 (Goldberger, Jack) (Entered: 06/20/2008) 06/20/2008 14 Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Respond To Complaint by Jeffrey Epstein. (Goldberger, Jack) (Entered: 06/20/2008) 06/25/2008 15 MEMORANDUM in Support re 7 Plaintiffs MOTION for Entry of Default by Clerk Against Defendant filed by Jane Doe No. 4. (Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 06/25/2008) 06/25/2008 16 RESPONSE to Motion re 11 MOTION to Set Aside Default filed by Jane Doe No. 4. Replies due by 7/7/2008. (Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 06/25/2008) 07/01/2008 17 NOTICE by Jeffrey Epstein Concerning Motion To Stay [DE 13) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit "A" Final Disposition Sheets)(Goldberger, Jack) (Entered: 07/01/2008) 07/07/2008 111 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Michael Ross Tein on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein (Tein, Michael) (Entered: 07/07/2008) 07/07/2008 1.9 MOTION Epstein's Reply in Support of Motion [DE11] to Set Aside Clerk's Default by Jeffrey Epstein. (rein, Michael) (Entered: 07/07/2008) 07/08/2008 2,0 RESPONSE in Support re H MOTION to Set Aside Default filed by Jeffrey Epstein. (Goldberger, Jack) (Entered: 07/08/2008) 07/08/2008 21 NOTICE by Jeffrey Epstein re 2Q Response in Support of Motion [DE 11] To Set Aside Clerk's Default. (Goldberger, Jack) (Entered: 07/08/2008) 07/08/2008 22 NOTICE of Instruction to Filer: re 19 MOTION Epstein's Reply in Support of Motion [DE11] to Set Aside Clerk's Default filed by Jeffrey Epstein Error: Wrong Event Selected; Instruction to Filer: Counsel is instructed to re-file document using the correct event REPLY TO RESPONSE TO MOTION; In the future please select the proper event. (dg) (Entered: 07/08/2008) 07/08/2008 23 REPLY to Response to Motion re _a MOTION to Set Aside Default, 19 MOTION Epstein's Reply in Support of Motion [DE11] to Set Aside Clerk's Default Epstein's Reply in Support of Motion [DE11] to Set Aside Clerk's Default filed by Jeffrey Epstein. (rein, Michael) (Entered: 07/08/2008) 07/10/2008 24 Plaintiffs MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to la Defendant's MOTION to Stay by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 07/10/2008) 07/10/2008 25 Sealed Document. (yc) UNSEALED see DE 22 . Modified on 7/17/2008 (bs). (Entered: 07/10/2008) 07/10/2008 26 Sealed Document. (ye) UNSEALED see DE IQ . Modified on 7/17/2008 (bs). https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175778 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 5 of 17 (Entered: 07/10/2008) 07/10/2008 22 UNSEALED MOTION to Seal by Jeffrey Epstein. (previously filed as 25 sealed document) (bs) (Entered: 07/17/2008) 07/10/2008 12 UNSEALED Notice of Continued Pendency of Federal Criminal Action by Jeffrey Epstein (previously filed as 26 sealed document) (bs) (Entered: 07/17/2008) 07/16/2008 22 ORDER denying motion to file Ex Parte and Under Seal. The clerk shall unseal DE 25 and 26 and make them available for public inspection through CM/ECF at the earliest possible time. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 7/16/08. (ir) (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/17/2008: # I Docket Sheet) (bs). (Entered: 07/16/2008) 07/16/2008 28 ORDER denying without prejudice ll Motion to Set Aside Default. The Defendant has ten days to file a second motion to vacate the default. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 7/16/08. (ir) (Entered: 07/16/2008) 07/18/2008 31 RESPONSE to Motion re 13 Defendant's MOTION to Stay and Memorandum of Law filed by Jane Doe No. 4. Replies due by 7/28/2008. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 07/18/2008) 07/21/2008 32 AFFIDAVIT signed by : Jeffrey M. Herman. Regarding Service of Process and This Court's Order to Show Cause by Jane Doe No. 4. (Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 07/21/2008) 07/25/2008 32 MOTION for Hearing Defendant's Request for Oral Argument by Jeffrey Epstein. (Tein, Michael) (Entered: 07/25/2008) 07/25/2008 3±1 ORDER granting Ii. MOTION to Set Aside Default filed by Jeffrey Epstein. The Clerk's entry of Default DE a is vacated. The Court's Order DE a of July 16, 2008 is vacated. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 7/25/08. (ir) (Entered: 07/25/2008) 07/28/2008 35 UNSEALED Sealed Document. (tas) Modified on 8/12/2008 "Please see DE # 41 for Image" (gp). (Entered: 07/28/2008) 07/28/2008 36 UNSEALED Sealed Document. (tas) Modified on 8/12/2008 "Please see DE # 44 for Image** (gp). (Entered: 07/28/2008) 07/28/2008 43 UNSEALED MOTION for Leave to File by Jeffrey Epstein. (Originally DE # 35 } (gp) (Entered: 08/12/2008) 07/28/2008 44 UNSEALED REPLY to Response to Motion re 13 Defendant's MOTION to Stay filed by Jeffrey Epstein. (Originally DE # 36 } (gp) (Entered: 08/12/2008) 07/29/2008 17 NOTICE by Jeffrey Epstein Defendant's Notice of Filing Exhibits (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit BXTein, Michael) (Entered: 07/29/2008) 07/30/2008 a NOTICE by Jeffrey Epstein Waiver of Service (rein, Michael) (Entered: 07/30/2008) . lutps://eclflsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175779 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 6 of 17 08/05/2008 39 ORDER denying 13 Motion to Stay; granting nuns pro tune 24 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond ; denying as moot 31 Motion for Hearing. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 8/4/08. (ir) (Entered: 08/05/2008) 08/05/2008 40 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL. The Clerk shall unseal DE 36 Sealed Document, 35 Sealed Document and make them available for public inspection through CM/ECF. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 8/4/08. (ir) (Entered: 08/05/2008) 08/06/2008 41 Joint MOTION to Approve Stipulation for Acceptance of Service of Process and Agreed Date For Defendant's Responses to Complaints by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # 1 Stipulation, # 2 Text of Proposed Order Approving Stipulation)(Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 08/06/2008) 08/07/2008 42 ENDORSED ORDER granting 41 Motion to Approve Stipulation for Acceptance of Service of Process and Agreed Date For Defendant's Responses to Complaints. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 8/6/08. (ir) (Entered: 08/07/2008) 08/07/2008 Reset Answer Due Deadline: Jeffrey Epstein response due 9/4/2008. (ir) (Entered: 08/07/2008) 08/27/2008 45 NOTICE by Jeffrey Epstein Notice of Appearance (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 08/27/2008) 08/28/2008 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 45 Notice (Other) filed by Jeffrey Epstein. Error - Wrong Event Selected; Correction - Redocketed by Clerk as NOTICE of Attorney Appearance. Instruction to Filer - In the future, please select the proper event. It is not necessary to refile this document. (ail) (Entered: 08/28/2008) 08/28/2008 46 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Michael James Pike, Robert Deweese Critton, Jr on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein (ail) (Entered: 08/28/2008) 09/04/2008 42 Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss 1 Complaint by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 9/22/2008 (Tein, Michael) (Entered: 09/04/2008) 09/22/2008 41 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 42 Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss 1 Complaint filed by Jane Doe No. 4. (Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 09/22/2008) 09/22/2008 49 AMENDED COMPLAINT, filed by Jane Doe No. 4.(Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 09/22/2008) 09/23/2008 50 ENDORSED ORDER denying as moot 2 Motion for Judgment upon Default. Clerk's entry of default vacated on 7/25/08. See DE 14 . Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Matra on 9/23/08. (ir) (Entered: 09/23/2008) 09/23/2008 51 ORDER denying as moot 42 Motion to Dismiss; denying as moot 14 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 9/23/08. (ir) (Entered: 09/23/2008) 09/25/2008 52 SCHEDULING REPORT- Rule 26(1). (Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 09/25/2008) 09/30/2008 53 SCHEDULING ORDER: Jury Trial set for 1/25/2010 09:00 AM in West https://ectflsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175780 CM/ECF - Live Database - fisd Page 7 of 17 Palm Beach Division before Judge Kenneth A. Marra. Calendar Call set for 1/22/201010:00 AM in West Palm Beach Division before Judge Kenneth A. Marra., Amended Pleadings due by 12/1/2008. Discovery due by 8/3/2009. Motions due by 8/31/2009. 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 9/29/08. (ir) (Entered: 09/30/2008) 10/06/2008 54 Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss 42 Amended Complaint and for More Definite Statement by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 10/24/2008 (Critton, Robert) (Entered: 10/06/2008) 10/24/2008 55 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 54 Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss 42 Amended Complaint and for More Definite Statement by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 10/24/2008) 10/27/2008 5.6 ORDER granting (47 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to (46) Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss (42) Amended Complaint and for More Definite Statement ( Responses due by 10/31/2008) in case 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM; granting (43) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (47 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to (46) Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss (42) Amended Complaint and for More Definite Statement in case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM; granting (55) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (47 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to (46) Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss (42) Amended Complaint and for More Definite Statement incase 9:08-cv-80380-KAM; granting (53) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re (47 in 9:08-cv-80119-1CAM) Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to (46) Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss (42) Amended Complaint and for More Definite Statement in case 9:08-cv-80381-ICAM in case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 10/24/2008. (ir) (Entered: 10/27/2008) 10/28/20(1 S Reset Deadlines as to Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss (49) Amended Complaint and for More Definite Statement. Responses due by 10/31/2008. (ir) (Entered: 10/28/2008) 10/31/2008 • 52 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 54 Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss 42 Amended Complaint and for More Definite Statement filed by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # I_ Exhibit A)(Herman, Jeffrey) (Entered: 10/31/2008) 11/10/2008 5$1 RESPONSE/REPLY to 52 Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss filed by Jeffrey Epstein. (Critton, Robert) (Entered: 11/10/2008) 12/30/2008 52 NOTICE by Jeffrey Epstein of Withdrawal as Co-Counsel (Tein, Michael) (Entered: 12/30/2008) 02/12/2009 6.0 OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 54 Motion to Dismiss and Motion for More Definite Statement. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 2/12/2009. (ir) (Entered: 02/12/2009) https://ecf.fisd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175781 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 8 of 17 02/23/2009 61 NOTICE by Jane Doe No. 4 of Change of Name of Plaintiffs Counsel (Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 02/23/2009) 02/27/2009 52 AMENDED COMPLAINT (Second), filed by Jane Doe No. 4.(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 02/27/2009) 03/02/2009 62 Plaintiffs MOTION to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support by Jane Doe No. 4. Responses due by 3/19/2009 (Attachments: # I Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 03/02/2009) 03/04/2009 M Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 62 Amended Complaint with proposed Order by Jeffrey Epstein. (Critton, Robert) (Entered: 03/04/2009) 03/05/2009 65 ENDORSED ORDER granting 64 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) 03/06/2009 56 Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 62 Plaintiffs MOTION to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support with proposed Order by Jeffrey Epstein. (Critton, Robert) (Entered: 03/06/2009) 03/12/2009 6/ ORDER granting 56 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re 61 Plaintiffs MOTION to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support. Responses due by 3/25/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson on 3/12/2009. (kza) (Entered: 03/13/2009) 03/18/2009 5B. Defendant's MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages with proposed Order in Response to 62 Motion to Compel Answers and Interrogatories and Production of Documents, Including Supporting Memorandum of Law by Jeffrey Epstein. (Critton, Robert) Modified link and text on 3/19/2009 (tas). (Entered: 03/18/2009) 03/19/2009 69 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 61 Defendant's MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages with proposed Order filed by Jeffrey Epstein. Error - Incorrect Document Link/No Link; Correction - Document relinked properly by Clerk. Instruction to filer - In the future, please link the document to the proper entry. It is not necessary to refile this document. (tas) (Entered: 03/19/2009) 03/25/2009 ZQ RESPONSE to Motion re 62 Plaintiffs MOTION to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support filed by Jeffrey Epstein. Replies due kl/ 4/6/2009. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # a Exhibit )(Critton, Robert) (Entered: 03/25/2009) 03/25/2009 11_ ORDER Granting 68 Motion to Exceed Page Limitation. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson on 3/24/2009. (sa) (Entered: 03/25/2009) 03/25/2009 U Defendant's MOTION to Stay re 62 Amended Complaint by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 4/13/2009 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # a https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175782 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 9 of 17 Exhibit I)(Pike, Michael) (Entered: 03/25/2009) 03/27/2009 71 MOTION for Protective Order Against Piecemeal Depositions ofJane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 03/27/2009) 04/0' 009 :74 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 , # 4 Exhibit D)(Critton, Robert) (Entered: 04/02/2009) 04/02/2009 715 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, # a Exhibit I(Critton, Robert) (Entered: 04/02/2009) 04/02/2009 76 Defendant's ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Amended Complaint (Second) by Jeffrey Epstein.(Critton, Robert) (Entered: 04/02/2009) 04/03/2009 72 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Reply as to 20 Response to Motion, to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order) (Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/03/2009) 04/06/2009 71 Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 21 MOTION for Protective Order Against Piecemeal Depositions of Jane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 04/06/2009) 04/07/2009 79 ENDORSED ORDER granting 71 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond re 7,1 MOTION for Protective Order Against Piecemeal Depositions ofJane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law. Responses due by 4/13/2009. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 4/7/2009. (ir) (Entered: 04/07/2009) 04/10/2009 80 Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 73 MOTION for Protective Order Against Piecemeal Depositions ofJane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, 79 Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer, (Amended) by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 04/10/2009) 04 1 '00() 81 ENDORSED ORDER granting (73) 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 ofJane 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 (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-KAM; granting (80) Motion for Extension of 'rime 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 https://cclflsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/Dk141.pr992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175783 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 10 of 17 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 $2 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Memorandum in Opposition to Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/13/2009) 04/14/2009 83 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-ICAM; granting (82) 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-80380-KAM; granting (73) 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-80381-ICAM; 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-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv-80994-KAM in case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM. ( Responses due by 4/23/2009). Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 4/14/2009. (ir) (Entered: 04/14/2009) 04/16/2009 84 Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 23. MOTION for Protective Order Against Piecemeal Depositions of Jane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes ofDiscovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law, by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) Modified on 4/20/2009 (Is). (Entered: 04/16/2009) 04/17/2009 85 ENDORSED ORDER granting (77) 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-80119-ICAM; granting (84) 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 (35) 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-80993-KAM in case 9:08-cv- https://ec£flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?9921353I4634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175784 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd ( Page 11 of 17 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 $6 RESPONSE to Motion re 23 MOTION for Protective Order Against Piecemeal Depositions ofJane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law filed by Jeffrey Epstein. Replies due by 4/27/2009. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 04/17/2009) 04/17/2009 al Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 24 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to 1st RTP, 25 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogs by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/17/2009) 04/20/2009 al MEMORANDUM in Support re 63 Plaintiffs MOTION to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support by Jane Doe No. 4. (Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/20/2009) 04/23/2009 89 RESPONSE in Opposition re 22 Defendant's MOTION to Stay re 62 Amended Complaint filed by Jane Doe No. 4. (Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/23/2009) 04/27,2009 90 ORDER Granting 22 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Memoranda re 20 Response to Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents. Reply due by 4/20/2009.Signed by Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson on 4/27/2009. (sa) (Entered: 04/27/2009) 04/27/2009 91 ORDER Granting fil Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Reply to 24 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to First Request to Produce, 25 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Answers to First set of Interrogatories. Reply due by 4/29/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson on 4/27/2009. (sa) (Entered: 04/27/2009) 04/27/2009 92 MEMORANDUM in Support re 23 MOTION for Protective Order Against Piecemeal Depositions of Jane Doe No. 4, Motion to Consolidate Cases for Purposes of Discovery, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law by Jane Doe No. 4. (Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/27/2009) 04/29/2009 93 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 94 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 24 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to 1st RTP, 25 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogs by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/29/2009) 05/01/2009 25 ORDER Granting 94 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Response to 24 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Answers to First Request to Produce 25 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Answers to First set of Interrogatories. https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/egi-bin/DktRpt.pl?992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175785 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd ( Page 12 of 17 Response due by 5/6/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson on 5/1/2009. (sa) (Entered: 05/01/2009) 05/04/2009 2.6 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 93 Order on Motion for Protective Order by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/04/2009) 05/05/2009 22 Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Reply as to $2 Response in Opposition to Motion to Stay by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/05/2009) 05/06/2009 98 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-ICAM) 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-ICAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (56) Amended Complaint in case 9:08-cv-80994-KAM in case 9:08- cv-80119-ICAM. ( Replies due by 5/20/2009.). Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/5/2009. (ir) (Entered: 05/06/2009) 05/06/2009 22 RESPONSE in Opposition re 25 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Answers to 1st Interrogs and for an Award of Reasonable Expenses filed by Jane Doe No. 4. ((Iorowitz, Adam) (Entered: 05/06/2009) 05/06/2009 100 RESPONSE in Opposition re 24 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Response to 1st RTP , Overrule Objections and for an Award of Reasonable Expenses filed by Jane Doe No. 4. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 05/06/2009) 05/06/2009 101 Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identity Doe #4 in Style of Case and Third- Party Subpoenas by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 5/26/2009 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/06/2009) 05/11/2009 102 Defendant's MOTION for Order requiring that plaintiff use Proper Case Style in all Filings by Jeffrey Epstein. (Critton, Robert) Modified on 5/13/2009 (Is). [Text modified by Clerk] (Entered: 05/11/2009) 05/13/2009 103 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 102 Defendant's MOTION Require Plaintiff to Use Proper Case Style filed by Jeffrey Epstein. Error - Docket text does not match document; Correction - Docket text modified by Clerk. It is not necessary to refile this document. (Is) (Entered: 05/13/2009) 05/13/2009 la RESPONSE/REPLY to 89 Response in Opposition to Motion to Stay and/or Continue Action by Jeffrey Epstein. (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2009) https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175786 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 13 of 17 05/14/2009 Cases associated. (dg) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/14/2009 1(1,1 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 if& 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 107 ORDER terminating 72 Motion to Stay; terminating 101 Motion to Compel. See Order consolidating cases. See procedural motions pending: DE 65 and DE 91 in 08-80119.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/15/2009. (Ic3) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/14/2009 108 ORDER denying 102 Motion. See Order consolidating cases.. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/15/2009. (1c3) (Entered: 05/14/2009) 05/18/2009 1_09 Defendant's 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-ICAM et al.(Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/18/2009) 05/19/2009 no Defendant's MOTION to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 6/8/2009 (Attachments: # I Exhibit A)Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM et al.(Pike, Michael) (Entered: 05/19/2009) 05/19/2009 al. MOTION for Leave to Withdraw as Co-Counsel by Jeffrey Epstein. (Attachments: # I Text of Proposed Order)(Tein, Michael) Event Modified on 5/20/2009 (ail). (Entered: 05/19/2009) 05/20/2009 112 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-ICAM; 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-ICAM; terminating (62) Motion to Strike in case 9.08-cv-80893-ICAM; terminating (62) Motion to Strike in case 9:08-cv-80993-KAM; terminating (50) Motion to Strike in case 9:08-cv-80994-ICAM. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 5/20/2009. (1c3) (Entered: 05/20/2009) 05/20/2009 al NOTICE by . of Filing Withdrawal of Previously Raised • ions to Defendant, e ey pstein's Motion to Compel And/Or Identify . in the Style of This Case and Motion to Identifr C.M.A. 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 114 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 111 MOTION https://ecf. flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175787 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 14 of 17 Motion for Leave to Withdraw as Co-Counsel filed by Jeffrey Epstein. The Filer selected the wrong motion relief when docketing the Motion. The correction was made by the Clerk. It is not necessary to refile this document but future motions filed must include all applicable relief events. (ail) (Entered: 05/20/2009) 05/20/2009 115 ORDER STRIKING 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) (Entered: 05/20/2009) 05/21/2009 116 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 110 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: 05/21/2009) 05/21/2009 Ili 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) 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-ICAM et al.(Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 05/21/2009) 05/22/20)o) 118 ORDER terminating (100) Motion for Extension of Time to Respond in case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM; 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. (1c3) (Entered: 05/22/2009) 05/27/2009 119 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-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 120 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 121 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by . on behalf of United States of America Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. https://ectfIsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175788 CWECF - Live Database - flsd I Page 15 of 17 ( , ) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05/29/2009 122 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-ICAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (18) Amended Complaint, (22 in 9:08-cv- 80993-1CAM) Defendant's MOTION to Stay re (19) Amended Complaint, (65 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) 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 AmiSlies dta 6/8/2009. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM et al ( M (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05 '9 2001) 123 RESPONSE in Opposition re (90 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM) Defendant's MOTION to Compel Identifr Doe in Style of Case and in Third-Party Subpoenas, (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 enhy 90) filed 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 124 ORDER STRIKING (124 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM, 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-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- 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. (Ic3) (Entered: 05/29/2009) 05/29/2009 121 MOTION for Leave to File UNDER SEAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STAY OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO UNSEAL THE NONPROSECUTIONAGREEMEIVT 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 12¢ 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 127 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-KAM, 110 in 9:08-cv-80381-KAM, 63 in 9:08-cv-80994-ICAM, 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-ICAM, 108 in 9:08- cv-80232-KAM, 62 in 9:08-cv-80994-ICAM, 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 hrips://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175789 CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd Page 16 of 17 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. (Ic3) (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 128 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 129 ORDER STRIKING (112 in 9:08-cv-80381-KAM, Ill in 9:08-cv-80232- KAM, 136 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM, Ill in 9:08-cv-80811-ICAM, 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-ICAM, 27 in 9:09-cv-80656-KAM, 32 in 9:09-cv-80469- KAM, 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-80119-1CAM et al. (1c3) (Entered: 06/04/2009) 06/08/2009 130 RESPONSE to Motion re (91 in 9:08-ev-80119-1CAM) 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- 1C.AM et al.(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 06/08/2009) 06/08/200') 131 NOTICE by Jane Doe re (113 in 9:08-cv-80119-ICAM) Plaintiff's MOTION Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe I02's Motion for No-Contact Order -Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 Notice of Joinder Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119- 1CAM et al.(Horowitz, Adam) (Entered: 06/08/2009) 06/09/2009 132 Unopposed MOTION to Amend/Correct 2¢ Answer to Amended Complaint by Jeffrey Epstein. Responses due by 6/26/2009 (Attachments: # I Exhibit "A", # 2 Exhibit "B", # a Text of Proposed Order Order)(Pike, Michael) (Entered: 06/09/2009) PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt 06/09/2009 16:37:51 https://ectflsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175790 CWECF - Live Database - flsd Page 17 of 17 PACER Login:liciu4480 IIClient Code: Description: Billable Pages: Docket Report II Search Criteria: Cost: 9:08-cv-80380- KAM 0.88 https://ecf flsd.uscourts.govicgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?992135314634222-L_801_0-1 6/9/2009 EFTA00175791 Case 9:08-cv-8' 0-KAM Document 54 Entered FLSD Docket 10/ 2008 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 4 1. Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT DIRECTED TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant, JEFFERY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves to dismiss and for more definite statement of Plaintiff JANE DOE NO. 4's Amended Complaint. Rules 12(b)(6), and 12(e) and (f), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2008). In support of his motion, Defendant states: Introduction Defendant is filing similar motions to dismiss and for more definite statement directed to the Amended Complaints filed against Defendant in this Court in JANE DOE NO. 2, JANE DOE NO. 3, JANE DOE NO. 4 and JANE DOE NO. 5. The motions are directed to the Counts for "Sexual Assault and Battery," and "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 . §2422" in each of the respective complaints. However, there are distinctions in the four motions filed based on the complaint allegations. For example, Defendant challenges the Plaintiffs' allegations as to assault in all four actions, and challenges the battery allegations in JANE DOE NOS. 2 and 3, EFTA00175792 Case 9:08-cv-8( 0-KAM Document 54 Entered. CLSD Docket 10/' !008 Page 2 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 2 but not in JANE DOE NOS. 4 and 5. Defendant moves to dismiss the §2422 count in all four actions. Motion 1. Counts I and III of the Amended Complaint are required to be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6). Plaintiff has failed to allege sufficient factual allegations in the Counts and instead alleges labels and conclusions, and an attempted formulaic recitation of the elements in each Count. 2. In the alternative, Defendant seeks more definite statement of Count I and III. In Count I, the Plaintiff is required to more definitely allege in the context of the claim for assault underlying factual allegations pertaining to the creation in Plaintiff of "imminent fear of peril;"; what EPSTEIN said and did, if anything, to create fear and apprehension in Plaintiff. In Count III, Plaintiff is required to more definitely state the underlying factual allegations to support her claim as set forth in the statute, 18 . §2422(b) and §2455. Rule 12(e). See discussion of law below herein. 3. Also, Plaintiff's reference in Count III to 28 . §2255, pertaining to habeas corpus proceedings is required to be stricken as immaterial. Rule 12(f). Plaintiff is required to more definitely state what statutory provision she is relying on. Rule 12 (e). WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court dismiss Counts I and III, strike the immaterial statutory reference, and require Plaintiff to more definitely plead the underlying elements of her claims. Supporting Memorandum of Law Standard on Rule 12(b)(6) Motion To Dismiss As established by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp.'. Twombly 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007), a motion to dismiss should be granted if the plaintiff does not plead EFTA00175793 Case 9:08-cv-8( 3-KAM Document 54 Entered =LSD Docket 10/I `.008 Page 3 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 3 "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id, at 1974. Although the complaint need not provide detailed factual allegations, the basis for relief in the complaint must state "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id, at 1965. Further, "[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level ... on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact)." Id. On a motion to dismiss, the well pleaded allegations of plaintiffs complaint are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. DeKalb County Sch. Dist., 446 F.3d 1153, 1156 (11th Cir.2006). Significantly, the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp.'. Twomblv abrogated the often cited observation that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove not set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief." Id, (abrogating and quoting Conley Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 102, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)). The Supreme Court rejected the notion that "a wholly conclusory statement of claim [can] survive a motion to dismiss whenever the pleadings le[ave] open the possibility that a plaintiff might later establish some 'set of [undisclosed] facts' to support recovery." Id. As explained by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. supra at 1664-65: While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6) moti to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations, ibid.; Saniva . American Bd. of Psychiatry and Neuroloay. Inc. 40 F.3d 247, 251 .7 1994), a plaintiffs obligation to provide the "grounds" of his "entitle[ment] to relief' requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulpic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do, see Papasan I. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 286, 106 S.Ct. 2932, 92 L.Ed.2d 209 (1986) (on a motion to dismiss, courts "are not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation"). Factual allegations Quist be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level, see 5 Wright & A. Miller Federal Practice and EFTA00175794 Case 9:08-cv-8' 0-KAM Document 54 Entered. FLSD Docket 10/ ?008 Page 4 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 4 Procedure § 1216, pp. 235-236 (3d ed.2004) (hereinafter Wright & Miller) ("[T]he pleading must contain something more ... than ... a statement of facts that merely creates a suspicion [of] a legally cognizable right of action"), on the assumption that all the allegation in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g., Swierkiewiczt. Sorem N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002); Neitzket. Williams 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" Rule 12(b)(6) does not countenance ... dismissals Ivsed on a judge's disbelief of a complaint's factual allegations"); Scheueri. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974) (a well-pleaded complaint may proceed even if it appears "that a recovery is very remote and unlikely"). Pursuant to Rule 12(e), a party may move for more definite statement of a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed where the pleading "is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably frame a response." The motion is required to point out the defects and the desired details. Id. Count I — "Sexual Assault and Battery" Is sublect to dismissal as Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be wanted. It is well settled that this Court is to apply Florida substantive law in this action. Erie R.Co.l. Tompkins 58 S.Ct. 817 (1938). Pursuant to Florida law, although the term "assault and battery" is most commonly referred to as if it were a legal unit, or a single concept, "assault and battery are separate and distinct legal concepts, assault being the beginning of an act which, if consummated, constitutes battery." 3A Fla.Jur.2d Assault §1. An assault and battery are intentional acts. See generally, Spivey I. Battaglia, 258 So.2d 815 (Fla. 1972); and Travelers Indem. PCR Inc., 889 So.2d 779 (Fla. 2004). An "assault" is an intentional, unlawful offer of corporal injury to another by force, or exertion of force directed toward another under such circumstances as to create a reasonable fear of imminent peril. See Lay I. Kremer, 411 So.2d 1347 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). It must be premised upon an affirmative act - a threat to use force, or the actual exertion of force. See 3A Fla.Jur.2d Assault §1("The essential element of the tort of assault is the violence offered, and not actual physical contact."). As further explained in Florida Jurisprudence, 2d, Assault §1 - EFTA00175795 Case 9:08-cv-8( )-KAM Document 54 Entered =LSD Docket 1011 :008 Page 5 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 5 An assault is defined as an intentional unlawful offer of corporal injury to another by force, or force unlawfully directed toward the person of another, under circumstances as to create a fear of imminent peril, coupled with the apparent present ability to effectuate the attempt. At common law, a tortious assault is an act that puts another in reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm. In ¶14 of her Amended Complaint, Plaintiff does plead the requisite "touching" element of "battery," so that aspect of the assault and battery claim is not being challenged. With the standard of pleading established in Twomblv supra, in the context of assault, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6). As to the elements of assault, here are no factual allegations as to what was said or done to Plaintiff such that it constituted an "intentional, unlawful offer of corporal injury to another by force, or exertion of force directed toward another under such circumstances as to create a reasonable fear of imminent peril." See ¶14 of Am. Comp. In fact, ¶14 alleges that JANE DOE NO. 4 "returned on many occasions to the Palm Beach mansion to provide Epstein with massages." Allegations as to circumstances creating a fear of imminent peril are lacking. Under applicable law, Plaintiff is required to give more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action. Twomblv, supra. Plaintiff is required to allege the facts of what was done to her; what EPSTEIN said and did, if anything, to create fear and apprehension in Plaintiff. As noted in the introduction and as this Court is well aware, there is more than one action brought against this Defendant attempting to allege similar sounding claims. With all due respect, the details as to a particular claim asserted by a particular Plaintiff are important to give this Defendant fair notice of Plaintiff's claim so he may properly respond. Accordingly, under applicable law, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for EFTA00175796 Case 9:08-cv-8( )-KAM Document 54 Entered =LSD Docket 101 008 Page 6 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 6 "sexual assault and battery" has Plaintiff has failed to plead requisite factual allegations concerning the assault. In the alternative to dismissing Count I, Defendant requests that Plaintiff be required to give more definite statement as to what was done to her; what EPSTEIN said and did, if anything, to create fear and apprehension in Plaintiff; in pleading the elements of assault. Rule 12(e). III - "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 42422" - Is sublect to dismissal as Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be qr Rule 12(b)(6). Count Ill also contains an immaterial reference to 28 . 42255. which is required to be stricken and more definitely stated. Count III of Plaintiff's Complaint attempts to assert a claim for "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 . §2422." In her prayer for relief in Count III, Plaintiff "demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for all damages available under 28 . §2255(a), ." Although the reference to "28 §2255," pertaining to habeas corpus proceedings - federal custody and remedies on motion attacking sentence, is probably a typographical error by Plaintiff, and the reference to "28" was meant to be "18," Defendant requests that Plaintiff correct this error so that Defendant may have fair notice of the claim Plaintiff is attempting to assert. Whether or not the "28" is typographical error, Defendant is still entitled to dismissal of the count. The applicable version of these statutory provisions, (pre-2006 Amendments, as the Amended Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2002-2003," ¶9), provides: CHAPTER 117--TRANSPORTATION FOR ILLEGAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY AND RELATED CRIMES § 2422. Coercion and enticement (a) Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any EFTA00175797 Case 9:08-cv-8' 0-KAM Document 54 Entered FLSD Docket 10/ '.008 Page 7 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 7 individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. (b) Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 30 years. I CHAPTER 110--SEXUAL EXPLOITATION AND OTHER ABUSE OF CHILDREN § 2255. Civil remedy for personal Injuries (a) Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(# 2242 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A 2260, 2421, 2422 or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than $50,000 in value. (b) Any action commenced under this section shall be barred unless the complaint is filed within six years after the right of action first accrues or in the case of a person under a legal disability, not later than three years after the disability. ' The above-quoted version of 18 MB §2422 is the post-2003 amendments which amended the statute as follows: 2003 Amendments. Subsec. (a). Pub.L. 108-21, 4 103(a)(2)(A) struck out "10" and inserted "20". Subsec. (b). Pub.L. 108-21, § 103(a)(2)(B) struck out "15" and inserted "30". Pub.L. 108-21. § 103(b)(2)(A)(i) struck out ", imprisoned" and inserted "and imprisoned not less than 5 years and". Pub.L. 108-21, 6. 103(b)(2)(A)(ii) struck out ", or both" at end of subsec. (b). Defendant is not waiving his right to claim that the pre-2003 amended version of the statute is applicable in this action. However, for purposes of this motion, the relevant statutory language is the same. EFTA00175798 Case 9:08-cv-8( 0-KAM Document 54 Entered =LSD Docket 10K 008 Page 8 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 8 Relevant to Plaintiffs complaint, 1a. 2255(a) creates a civil remedy for "a minor who is a victim of a violation of section ... 2422 ... of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation ... ." Plaintiff has failed to plead any factual allegations whatsoever pertaining to violations of 18a. 2422. Rather, Plaintiff has alleged conclusory allegations simply attempting to track parts of the statutory language in the statute without underlying factual allegations pertaining to the Plaintiff and any conduct by Defendant. See ¶29 of Am. Comp. Plaintiffs allegations, (or lack of factual allegations), are precisely what the standard set forth by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. prohibits — Plaintiffs complaint alleges only "labels and conclusions, and a (partial) formulaic recitation of the elements." First, the Amended Complaint fails to designate whether Plaintiff is relying on §2422(a) or §2422(b). Second, although the complaint does contain a partial tracking of the language in 18 MI. §2422(b), it contains absolutely no factual allegations concerning the requisite "using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce" by Plaintiff to state a cause of action based on a violation of 18 a. 2422(b). As well, there are no underlying factual allegations involving this Plaintiff as to the requisite elements that a defendant knowingly persuaded, induced, enticed, or coerced any individual (Plaintiff in this case) who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempted to do so. See 18 2422(b); i.e. with what criminal offense could Plaintiff and Defendant have been charged. Again, a Plaintiff cannot simply track the language of a statute without some underlying factual allegations to EFTA00175799 Case 9:08-cv-81 0-KAM Document 54 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 9 state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Accordingly, Count III is required to be Entered =LSD Docket 10K '008 Page 9 of 10 dismissed, and the reference to 28 USC 2455 be stricken. In the alternative, Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state the underlying factual allegations to support her claim as set forth in the statute, 18 §2422(b) and §2455. Conclusion As discussed above herein, under the pleading standard established in Twombly, supra, and law concerning the elements of Count I and III, Plaintiff has failed to state claims upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6). Plaintiffs complaint lack underlying factual allegations and, thus, Plaintiff is required to more definitely state the requisite factual allegations. Finally, Plaintiff should correct any improper statutory references. 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 sth day of October 2008: Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami. L 60 Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein EFTA00175800 Case 9:08-cv-80 LRAM Document 54 Entered ( -LSD Docket 10/0, )08 Page 10 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 10 Michael R. Tein, Esq. Lewis Tein, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 Coconut Grove, FL 33133 rax: Counse or e endant Jeffrey Epstein Respectfully submitt By: ROBERT D CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Ba No. 224162 , ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West ach, FL 33401 Phone Fax for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) EFTA00175801 Case 9:08-cv-1 30-KAM Document 62 Enterer FLSD Docket 02 2009 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOI INSON JANE DOE NO. 4, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 4 ("Jane" or "Jane Doc"), brings this Amended Complaint against Jeffrey Epstein, as follows: Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue 1. Jane Doc No. 4 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 §I 332(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 §I 33 I because Plaintiff alleges a claim under the laws of the United States. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 . §I 367(a) over all other claims set forth herein, which form part of - I - EFTA00175802 Case 9:08-cv-f 30-KAM Document 62 Enterer FLSD Docket 02 2009 Page 2 of 8 the same case or controversy. 7. This Court has venue of this action pursuant to 28 §§1391(a) and 1391(b) as a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District. Factual Allegations 8. At all relevant times, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") was an adult male, 52 years old. Epstein is a financier and money manager with a secret clientele limited exclusively to billionaires. He is himself a man of tremendous wealth, power and influence. He maintains his principal home in New York and also owns residences in New Mexico, St. Thomas and Palm Beach, FL. The allegations herein concern Epstein's conduct while at his lavish estate in Palm Beach. 9. Upon information and belief, Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls. He engaged in a plan and scheme in which he gained access to primarily economically disadvantaged minor girls in his home, sexually assaulted these girls, and then gave them money. In or about 2002-2003, Jane Doc, then approximately 15 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims. 10. Upon information and belief, Jeffrey Epstein carried out his scheme and assaulted girls in Florida, New York and on his private island, known as Little St. James, in St. Thomas. II. Epstein's scheme involved the use of young girls to recruit underage girls. a Palm Beach Community College student from Loxahatchee, Florida recruited girls ostensibly to give a wealthy man a massage for monetary compensation in his Palm Beach mansion. The young girls would be contacted when Epstein was planning to be at his Palm Beach residence or soon after he had arrived there. Ms. upon information and belief, generally sought out economically disadvantaged underage girls from western Palm Beach County who would be enticed by the money being offered - 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 - 2 - EFTA00175803 Case 9:08-cv-f 30-KAM Document 62 Enterer FLSD Docket 02 2009 Page 3 of 8 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 the kitchen entrance of Epstein's mansion, where she would be introduced to Epstein's assistant. Ms. would then bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table in addition to other furnishings. There were photographs of nude women lining the stairway hall and in the bedroom. The girl would then find herself alone in the room with Epstein, who would be wearing only a towel. He would then remove his towel and lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes. Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including and 13. Consistent with the foregoing plan and scheme, when Jane Doc was approximately 15 years old, she was recruited by to give Epstein a massage for monetary compensation. Jane was brought to Epstein's mansion in Palm Beach, to the kitchen entrance. Once there, Jane was introduced to who led her up the flight of stairs to the room with the massage table. In this room, Jane was directed by Epstein to remove her clothes and give him a massage. Jane initially kept her panties and bra on, and complied with Epstein's instructions. Jane was paid by Epstein for this massage. 14. Jane returned on many occasions to the Palm Beach mansion to provide Epstein with massages. On those occasions, Epstein engaged in sexual contact and activity with the minor Jane, which included, among other things, directing Jane to remove all her clothes, during the massage, and digitally MI= Jane's Jeffrey Epstein oftener on the minor Jane during the massage. This sexual abuse continued for approximately three years. IS. As a result of these encounters with Epstein, Jane experienced confusion, shame, humiliation and embarrassment, and has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries. - 3 - EFTA00175804 Case 9:08-cv-£ 10-KAM Document 62 Enterec' FLSD Docket 02/ ?009 Page 4 of 8 COUNT I Sexual Assault and Battery 16. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 15 above. 17. Epstein acted with intent to cause an offensive contact with Jane Doe, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and Jane Doe was thereby put in such imminent apprehension. 18. Epstein made an intentional, unlawful offer of offensive sexual contact toward Jane Doe, creating a reasonable fear of imminent peril. 19. Epstein intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. 20. Epstein tortiously committed a sexual assault and battery on Jane Doe. Epstein's acts were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful. 21. Epstein's plan and scheme in which he committed such acts upon Jane Doe were done willfully and maliciously. 22. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. COUNT II Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 23. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs I through 15 above. 24. Epstein's conduct was intentional or reckless. 25. Epstein's conduct with a minor was extreme and outrageous, going beyond all bounds of decency. - 4 - EFTA00175805 Case 9:08-cv-f 30-KAM Document 62 Enterer FLSD Docket 02. 2009 Page 5 of 8 26. Epstein committed willful acts of child sexual abuse on Jane Doe. These acts resulted in mental or sexual injury to Jane Doe, that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. 27. 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. 28. 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. 4 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 42422 29. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs I through 15 above. 30. 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. 31. 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- 009381AXXXMB and 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB), for conduct involving the same plan and scheme as alleged herein. 32. As to PlaintiffJane Doe, Epstein could have been charged with criminal violations of Florida Statute §796.07(2) (including subsections (I), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) thereof), and other - 5 - EFTA00175806 Case 9:08-cv-£ 30-KAM Document 62 Enterer: FLSD Docket 02/ 2009 Page 6 of 8 criminal offenses including violations of Florida Statutes §§ 798.02 and 800.04 (including subsections (5), (6) and (7) thereof). 33. Epstein's acts and conduct arc in violation of 18 §2422. 34. As a result of Epstein's violation of 18 §2422, Plaintiff has suffered personal injury, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. 35. Plaintiff hired Herman & Mermelstein, P.A., in this matter and agreed to pay them a reasonable attorneys' fee. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for all damages available under 18 . §2255(a), including without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, costs of suit, and attorneys' fees, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. JURY TRIAL DEMAND Plaintiff demands a jury trial in this action on all claims so triable. Dated: February 27, 2009 Respectfully submitted, By: s/ Adam D. 1 lorowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: Fax: - 6 - EFTA00175807 Case 9:08-cv-£ 30-KAM Document 62 Enterec FLSD Docket 024 ?009 Page 7 of 8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on February 27, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CWECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CWECF 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 - EFTA00175808 Case 9:08-cv-£ 10-KAM Document 62 Enterec FLSD Docket 02A 2009 Page 8 of 8 SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Jack Alan Goldber er Esq. Robert D. Critton Es . /s/ Adam D. Horowitz - 8 - EFTA00175809 Case 9:08-cv-8 '0-KAM Document 76 Entered FLSD Docket 041 309 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 4 1. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, files his Answer to the Second Amended Complaint 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 I. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy'. 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 - "Mt 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 EFTA00175810 Case 9:08-cv-8( 0-KAM Document 76 Entered .. . FLSD Docket 04/01 )09 Page 2 of 7 Jane Doe No. 4'. Epstein Page 2 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. 3. As to the allegations In paragraph 3, deny. 4. As to the allegations in paragraph 4, deny. 5. As to the allegations in paragraph 5, without knowledge and deny. 6. As to the allegations in paragraphs 6, Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi I. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. zim DCA 1983); Malloy'. 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 - "[i]t 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 Fla.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. 7. As to the allegations in paragraphs 7 through 15 of Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint, Defendant exercises his Fifth Amendment Privilege against self- EFTA00175811 ease 9:08-cv-8 1.0-KAM Document 76 Entered FLSD Docket 04/C 009 Page 3 of 7 Jane Doe No. 4 Epstein Page 3 Incrimination. See DeLisl Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Ha. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy 1 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 - "[i]t 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 Fla.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 I. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4m DCA 1983); Malloy'. 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 - "[fit would be incongruous to have different standards determine the EFTA00175812 Case 9:08-cv-8( 9-KAM Document 76 Entered, FLSD Docket 04/0; )09 Page 4 of 7 Jane Doe No. 4 Epstein Page 4 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 Fla.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. 10. In response to the allegations of paragraph 23, 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. 11. Defendant asserts the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimination to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 24 through 28 of the Second Amended Complaint. See DeLisi Bankers Ins. Company 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 41 DCA 1983); Malloy I 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 - "[l]t 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 EFTA00175813 Case 9:08-cv-f 30-KAM Document 76 Entere6 FLSD Docket 041( :009 Page 5 of 7 Jane Doe No. 4'. Epstein Page 5 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 I. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 41h DCA 1983); Malloy'. 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 Fla.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 EFTA00175814 Case 9:08-cv-8( 0-KAM Document 76 Entered. FLSD Docket 04/01 109 Page 6 of 7 Jane Doe No. 4 F. Epstein Page 6 application for affirmative relief' which would prevent a plaintiff bringing a claim seeking affirmative relief from asserting the privilege. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court deny the relief sought by Plaintiff. Affirmative Defenses 1. As to all counts, Plaintiff consented to and was a willing participant in the acts alleged. 2. As to all counts alleged, Plaintiff consented to and participated in conduct similar and/or identical to the acts alleged with other persons which were the sole or contributing cause of Plaintiff's alleged damages 3. As to all counts, Defendant reasonably believed that the Plaintiff had attained the age of 18 years old at the time of the alleged acts. 4. Plaintiffs claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. WHEREFORE Defendant requests that this Court deny the rail .ought by Plaintiff. Robert D. C on, Jr. Attorney for P efendant Epstein 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 recorcj Identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on thisoL ay of April , 2009: EFTA00175815 Case 9:08-cv-8( 0-KAM Document 76 Entered FLSD Docket 04/0' )09 Page 7 of 7 Jane Doe No. 4'. Epstein Page 7 Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 60 Fax: Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe 4 Jack Alan Goldberger Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 ach, FL 33401-5012 Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Respectfully submitte TON, JR., ESQ. 24162 m MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 ach, FL 33401 Phone Fax (Co-Counse for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) EFTA00175816 Case 9:08-cv, s80-KAM Docum. . 54 EntereL -n FLSD Docket 10/L .2008 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 4 1. Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT DIRECTED TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant, JEFFERY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves to dismiss and for more definite statement of Plaintiff JANE DOE NO. 4's Amended Complaint. Rules 12(b)(6), and 12(e) and (f), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2008). In support of his motion, Defendant states: Introduction Defendant is filing similar motions to dismiss and for more definite statement directed to the Amended Complaints filed against Defendant in this Court in JANE DOE NO. 2, JANE DOE NO. 3, JANE DOE NO. 4 and JANE DOE NO. 5. The motions are directed to the Counts for "Sexual Assault and Battery," and "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 §2422" in each of the respective complaints. However, there are distinctions in the four motions filed based on the complaint allegations. For example, Defendant challenges the Plaintiffs' allegations as to assault in all four actions, and challenges the battery allegations in JANE DOE NOS. 2 and 3, EFTA00175817 Case 9:08-cv-, )80-KAM Docum, . 54 Entere1/4 i FLSD Docket 10k 2008 Page 2 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 2 but not in JANE DOE NOS. 4 and 5. Defendant moves to dismiss the §2422 count in all four actions. Motion 1. Counts I and III of the Amended Complaint are required to be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6). Plaintiff has failed to allege sufficient factual allegations in the Counts and instead alleges labels and conclusions, and an attempted formulaic recitation of the elements in each Count. 2. In the alternative, Defendant seeks more definite statement of Count I and III. In Count I, the Plaintiff is required to more definitely allege in the context of the claim for assault underlying factual allegations pertaining to the creation in Plaintiff of "imminent fear of peril;"; what EPSTEIN said and did, if anything, to create fear and apprehension in Plaintiff. In Count III, Plaintiff is required to more definitely state the underlying factual allegations to support her claim as set forth in the statute, 18 . §2422(b) and §2455. Rule 12(e). See discussion of law below herein. 3. Also, Plaintiff's reference in Count III to 28 . §2255, pertaining to habeas corpus proceedings is required to be stricken as immaterial. Rule 12(f). Plaintiff is required to more definitely state what statutory provision she is relying on. Rule 12 (e). WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court dismiss Counts I and III, strike the immaterial statutory reference, and require Plaintiff to more definitely plead the underlying elements of her claims. Supporting Memorandum of Law Standard on Rule 1204(61 Motion To Dismiss As established by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp.,. Twomblv, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007), a motion to dismiss should be granted if the plaintiff does not plead EFTA00175818 Case 9:08-cv-,.. s80-KAM Docurn,. 54 Enterec. ,n FLSD Docket 10k .2008 Page 3 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 3 "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id, at 1974. Although the complaint need not provide detailed factual allegations, the basis for relief in the complaint must state "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id, at 1965. Further, "[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level ... on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact)." Id. On a motion to dismiss, the well pleaded allegations of plaintiffs complaint are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Sch. Dist., 446 F.3d 1153, 1156 (11th Cir.2006). Significantly, the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp.'. Twombly abrogated the often cited observation that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove not set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief." Id, (abrogating and quoting Conley I. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 102, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)). The Supreme Court rejected the notion that "a wholly conclusory statement of claim [can] survive a motion to dismiss whenever the pleadings le[ave] open the possibility that a plaintiff might later establish some 'set of [undisclosed] facts' to support recovery." Id. As explained by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. supra at 1664-65: . DeKalb Count While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6) moti to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations ibid.. Saniva . American Bd. of Psychiatry and Neuroloov, Inc. 40 F.3d 247, 251 .7 1994), a plaintiff's obligation to provide the "grounds" of his "entitle[ment] to relief" requires i more than labels and conclusions, and a formu is recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do, see Papasan . Allain 478 U.S. 265, 286, 106 S.Ct. 2932, 92 L.Ed.2d 209 (1986) (on a motion to dismiss, courts "are not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation"). Factual allegations 1st be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level, see 5 . Wright & A. Miller Federal Practice and EFTA00175819 Case 9:08-cv-t... j80-KAM Documc . 54 Enterer.. A FLSD Docket 10/...2008 Page 4 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 4 Procedure § 1216, pp. 235-236 (3d ed.2004) (hereinafter Wright & Miller) ("[T]he pleading must contain something more ... than ... a statement of facts that merely creates a suspicion [of] a legally cognizable right of action"), on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact), see, e.g. Swierkiewicz I. SoremaN. A., 534 U.S. 506, 508, n. 1, 122 S.Ct. 992, 152 L.Ed.2d 1 (2002); Neitzke I. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (" Rule 12(b)(6) does not I countenance ... dismissals b sed on a judge's disbelief of a complaint's factual allegations"); Scheuer . Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974) (a we -pleaded complaint may proceed even if it appears "that a recovery is very remote and unlikely"). Pursuant to Rule 12(e), a party may move for more definite statement of a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed where the pleading "is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably frame a response." The motion is required to point out the defects and the desired details. Id. Count I - "Sexual Assault and Battery" is sublect to dismissal as Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. It is well settled that this Court is to apply Florida substantive law in this action. Erie R.Co. I. Tompkins, 58 S.Ct. 817 (1938). Pursuant to Florida law, although the term "assault and battery" is most commonly referred to as if it were a legal unit, or a single concept, "assault and battery are separate and distinct legal concepts, assault being the beginning of an act which, if consummated, constitutes battery." 3A Fla.Jur.2d Assault §1. An assault and battery are intentional acts. See generally Spivey I. Battaglia, 258 So.2d 815 (Fla. 1972); and Travelers Indem. Co.'. PCR. Inc., 889 So.2d 779 (Fla. 2004). An "assault" is an intentional, unlawful offer of corporal injury to another by force, or exertion of force directed toward another under such circumstances as to create a reasonable fear of imminent peril. See Lav I. Kremer 411 So.2d 1347 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). It must be premised upon an affirmative act - a threat to use force, or the actual exertion of force. See 3A Fla.Jur.2d Assault §1("The essential element of the tort of assault is the violence offered, and not actual physical contact."). As further explained in Florida Jurisprudence, 2d Assault §1 - EFTA00175820 Case 9:08-1/-L .380-KAM Docum, 54 EnterdL sn FLSD Docket 10/L -2008 Page 5 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 5 An assault is defined as an intentional unlawful offer of corporal injury to another by force, or force unlawfully directed toward the person of another, under circumstances as to create a fear of imminent peril, coupled with the apparent present ability to effectuate the attempt. At common law, a tortious assault is an act that puts another in reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm. In ¶14 of her Amended Complaint, Plaintiff does plead the requisite "touching" element of "battery," so that aspect of the assault and battery claim is not being challenged. With the standard of pleading established in Twombly supra, in the context of assault, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6). As to the elements of assault, here are no factual allegations as to what was said or done to Plaintiff such that it constituted an "intentional, unlawful offer of corporal injury to another by force, or exertion of force directed toward another under such circumstances as to create a reasonable fear of imminent peril." See ¶14 of Am. Comp. In fact, ¶14 alleges that JANE DOE NO. 4 "returned on many occasions to the Palm Beach mansion to provide Epstein with massages." Allegations as to circumstances creating a fear of imminent peril are lacking. Under applicable law, Plaintiff is required to give more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action. Twombly supra. Plaintiff is required to allege the facts of what was done to her; what EPSTEIN said and did, if anything, to create fear and apprehension in Plaintiff. As noted in the introduction and as this Court is well aware, there is more than one action brought against this Defendant attempting to allege similar sounding claims. With all due respect, the details as to a particular claim asserted by a particular Plaintiff are important to give this Defendant fair notice of Plaintiffs claim so he may properly respond. Accordingly, under applicable law, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for EFTA00175821 Case 9:08-cv-b..080-KAM Docume... 54 Enterer., ...1 FLSD Docket 10/G 1008 Page 6 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 6 "sexual assault and battery" has Plaintiff has failed to plead requisite factual allegations concerning the assault. In the alternative to dismissing Count I, Defendant requests that Plaintiff be required to give more definite statement as to what was done to her; what EPSTEIN said and did, if anything, to create fear and apprehension in Plaintiff; in pleading the elements of assault. Rule 12(e). Ng Ill — "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 42422" - is sublect to dismissal as Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be Si Rule 12(b116). Count also contains an immaterial reference to 28 42255, which is required to be stricken and more definitely stated. Count III of Plaintiffs Complaint attempts to assert a claim for "Coercion and Enticement to Sexual Activity in Violation of 18 . §2422." In her prayer for relief in Count III, Plaintiff "demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for all damages available under 28 . §2255(a), ." Although the reference to "28 §2255," pertaining to habeas corpus proceedings — federal custody and remedies on motion attacking sentence, is probably a typographical error by Plaintiff, and the reference to "28" was meant to be "18," Defendant requests that Plaintiff correct this error so that Defendant may have fair notice of the claim Plaintiff is attempting to assert. Whether or not the "28" is typographical error, Defendant is still entitled to dismissal of the count. The applicable version of these statutory provisions, (pre-2006 Amendments, as the Amended Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2002-2003,"119), provides: CHAPTER 117--TRANSPORTATION FOR ILLEGAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY AND RELATED CRIMES § 2422. Coercion and enticement (a) Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any EFTA00175822 Case 9:08-cv-b...,80-KAM Docum€... 54 Entered ..,1 FLSD Docket 10/L.2008 Page 7 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 7 individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. (b) Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 30 years.' CHAPTER 110--SEXUAL EXPLOITATION AND OTHER ABUSE OF CHILDREN § 2255. Chill remedy for personal injuries (a) Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241 2242, 2243 2251 2251A, 2252, 2252A 2260 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than $50,000 in value. (b) Any action commenced under this section shall be barred unless the complaint is filed within six years after the right of action first accrues or in the case of a person under a legal disability, not later than three years after the disability. ' The above-quoted version of 18 §2422 is the post-2003 amendments which amended the statute as follows: 2003 Amendments. Subsec. (a). Pub.L. 108-21.4 103(a)(2)(A), struck out "10" and inserted "20". Subsec. (b). Pub.L. 108-21, 4 103(a)(2)(B) struck out "15" and inserted "30". Pub.L. 108-21, 4 103(b)(2)(A)(il, struck out ", imprisoned" and inserted "and imprisoned not less than 5 years and". Pub.L. 108-21, 4 103(b)(2)(A)(ii) struck out ", or both" at end of subsec. (b). Defendant is not waiving his right to claim that the pre-2003 amended version of the statute is applicable in this action. However, for purposes of this motion, the relevant statutory language is the same. EFTA00175823 Case 9:08-cv-b_.,80-KAM Docurni.. . 54 Enterer ...1 FLSD Docket 10/C 2008 Page 8 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 8 Relevant to Plaintiffs complaint, 1a. 2255(a) creates a civil remedy for "a minor who is a victim of a violation of section ... 2422 ... of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation ." Plaintiff has failed to plead any factual allegations whatsoever pertaining to violations of 18IIII. 2422. Rather, Plaintiff has alleged conclusory allegations simply attempting to track parts of the statutory language in the statute without underlying factual allegations pertaining to the Plaintiff and any conduct by Defendant. See ¶29 of Am. Comp. Plaintiffs allegations, (or lack of factual allegations), are precisely what the standard set forth by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. prohibits — Plaintiffs complaint alleges only "labels and conclusions, and a (partial) formulaic recitation of the elements." First, the Amended Complaint fails to designate whether Plaintiff is relying on §2422(a) or §2422(b). Second, although the complaint does contain a partial tracking of the language in 18 §2422(b), it contains absolutely no factual allegations concerning the requisite "using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce" by Plaintiff to state a cause of action based on a violation of 18 a. 2422(b). As well, there are no underlying factual allegations involving this Plaintiff as to the requisite elements that a defendant knowingly persuaded, induced, enticed, or coerced any individual (Plaintiff in this case) who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempted to do so. See 18-. 2422(b); i.e. with what criminal offense could Plaintiff and Defendant have been charged. Again, a Plaintiff cannot simply track the language of a statute without some underlying factual allegations to EFTA00175824 Case 9:08-v/4,480-KAM Docurrm. . 54 Enterer.. FLSD Docket 10/C [008 Page 9 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 9 state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Accordingly, Count Ill is required to be dismissed, and the reference to 28 USC 2455 be stricken. In the alternative, Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state the underlying factual allegations to support her claim as set forth in the statute, 1a. §2422(b) and §2455. Conclusion As discussed above herein, under the pleading standard established in Twomblv, supra, and law concerning the elements of Count I and III, Plaintiff has failed to state claims upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6). Plaintiff's complaint lack underlying factual allegations and, thus, Plaintiff is required to more definitely state the requisite factual allegations. Finally, Plaintiff should correct any improper statutory references. 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 61h day of October, 2008: Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 60 Fax: Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #4 Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 ach, FL 33401-5012 Fax: Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein EFTA00175825 Case 9:08-cv-8L_J0-KAM Documei. .A Entered . FLSD Docket 10/0%. .008 Page 10 of 10 Case No. CV-80380-Marra-Johnson Page No. 10 Michael R. Tein, Esq. Lewis Tein, P.L. 3059 Grand Avenue, Suite 340 e, FL 33133 ant Jeffrey Epstein Respectfully submitt By: ROBERT D CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Ba o. 224162 MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 We t - u = =ach, FL 33401 Phone Fax ounsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) EFTA00175826 Case 9:08-cv-bv,.)80-KAM Document 49 Entereo FLSD Docket 09,-4/2008 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 4, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. AMENDED COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Jane Doc No. 4 ("Jane" or "Jane Doe"), brings this Amended Complaint against Jeffrey Epstein, as follows: Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue I. Jane Doe No. 4 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 Ncw 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 §I 332(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 §1331 because Plaintiff alleges a claim under the laws of the United States. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 . §1367(a) over all other claims set forth herein, which form part of HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P. A. - 1 - EFTA00175827 Case 9:08-cv-buo80-KAM Document 49 Entereo ..,n FLSD Docket 09,-4/2008 Page 2 of 8 the same case or controversy. 7. This Court has venue of this action pursuant to 28 §§1391(a) and 1391(6) as a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District. Factual Allocations 8. At all relevant times, Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") was an adult male, 52 years old. Epstein is a financier and moncy manager with a secret clientele limited exclusively to billionaires. Ile is himself a man of tremendous wealth, power and influence. l le maintains his principal home in New York and also owns residences in New Mexico, St. Thomas and Palm Beach, FL. The allegations herein concern Epstein's conduct while at his lavish estate in Palm Beach. 9. Upon information and belief, Epstein has a sexual preference and obsession for underage minor girls. He engaged in a plan and scheme in which he gained access to primarily economically disadvantaged minor girls in his home, sexually assaulted these girls, and then gave them money. In or about 2002-2003, Jane Doe, then approximately 15 years old, fell into Epstein's trap and became one of his victims. 10. Upon information and belief, Jeffrey Epstein carried out his scheme and assaulted girls in Florida, New York and on his private island, known as Little St. James, in St. Thomas. II. Epstein's scheme involved the use of young girls to recruit underage girls. a Palm Beach Community College student from Loxahatchee, Florida recruited girls ostensibly to give a wealthy man a massage for monetary compensation in his Palm Beach mansion. The young girls would be contacted when Epstein was planning to be at his Palm Beach residence or soon after he had arrived there. Ms. upon information and belief, generally sought out economically disadvantaged underage girls from western Palm Beach County who would be enticed by the money being offered - 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 HERMAN Ek MERMELSTEIN, P. A. - 2 - EFTA00175828 • Case 9:08-cv-o...O80-KAM Document 49 Enterec FLSD Docket 09,_,../2008 Page 3 of 8 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 the kitchen entrance of Epstein's mansion, where she would be introduced to Epstein's assistant. Ms. vould then bring the girl up a flight of stairs to a bedroom that contained a massage table in addition to other furnishings. There were photographs of nude women lining the stairway hall and in the bedroom. The girl would then find herself alone in the room with Epstein, who would be wearing only a towel. He would then remove his towel and lie naked on the massage table, and direct the girl to remove her clothes. Epstein would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious and sexual acts, including and touching the girl's 13. Consistent with the foregoing plan and scheme, when Jane Doe was approximately 15 years old, she was recruited by to give Epstein a massage for monetary compensation. Jane was brought to Epstein's mansion in Palm Beach, to the kitchen entrance. Once there, Jane was introduced to who led her up the flight of stairs to the room with the massage table. In this room, Jane was directed by Epstein to remove her clothes and give him a massage. Jane initially kept her panties and bra on, and complied with Epstein's instructions. Jane was paid by Epstein for this massage. 14. Jane returned on many occasions to the Palm Beach mansion to provide Epstein with massages. On those occasions, Epstein engaged in sexual contact and activity with the minor Jane, which included, among other things, directing Jane to remove all her clothes, Jeffrey Epstein often usedalMon the minor Jane during the massage. This sexual abuse continued for approximately three years. 15. As a result of these encounters with Epstein, Jane experienced confusion, shame, humiliation and embarrassment, and has suffered severe psychological and emotional injuries. HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P. A. -3- EFTA00175829 . Case 9:08-cv-L ...)130-KAM Document 49 Enterer. FLSD Docket 09,___/2008 Page 4 of 8 COUNT I Sexual Assault and Battery 16. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 15 above. 17. Epstein acted with intent to cause an offensive contact with Jane Doe, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and Jane Doe was thereby put in such imminent apprehension. 18. Epstein made an intentional, unlawful offer of offensive sexual contact toward Jane Doe, creating a reasonable fear of imminent peril. 19. Epstein intentionally inflicted harmful or offensive contact on the person of Jane Doe, with the intent to cause such contact or the apprehension that such contact is imminent. 20. Epstein tortiously committed a sexual assault and battery on Jane Doe. Epstein's acts were intentional, unlawful, offensive and harmful. 21. Epstein's plan and scheme in which he committed such acts upon Jane Doe were done willfully and maliciously. 22. As a direct and proximate result of Epstein's assault on Jane, she has suffered and will continue to suffer severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein for compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. COUNT II Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 23. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 15 above. 24. Epstein's conduct was intentional or reckless. 25. Epstein's conduct with a minor was extreme and outrageous, going beyond all bounds of decency. HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P. A. -4- EFTA00175830 Case 9:08-cv-L580-KAM Document 49 EntereL FLSD Docket 09,-z/2008 Page 5 of 8 26. Epstein committed willful acts of child sexual abuse on Jane Doe. These acts resulted in mental or sexual injury to Jane Doe, that caused or were likely to cause Jane Doe's mental or emotional health to be significantly impaired. 27. Epstein's conduct caused severe emotional distress to Jane Doe. Epstein knew or had mason 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. 28. 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. 4 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 M. 42422 29. Plaintiff Jane Doe repeats and realleges paragraphs I through 15 above. 30. 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. 31. Epstein's acts and conduct are in violation of 18 . §2422. 32. As a result of Epstein's violation of I 8 . §2422, Plaintiff has suffered personal injury, including mental, psychological and emotional damages. 33. Plaintiff hired Herman & Mermelstein, P.A., in this matter and agreed to pay them a reasonable attorneys' fee. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 4 demands judgment against Defendant Jeffrey HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN, P. A. - 5 - EFTA00175831 Case 9:08-cv-b,,s80-KAM Document 49 Entereci n FLSD Docket 09/-2/2008 Page 6 of 8 Epstein for all damages available under 28 §2255(a), including without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, costs of suit, and attorneys' fees, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. JURY TRIAL DEMAND Plaintiff demands a jury trial in this action on all claims so triable. Dated: September 22, 2008 Respectfully submitted, By: s/ Jeffrey M. Herman Jeffre M. Herman FL Bar No. 521647) Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) HERMAN 6. MERMELSTE1N, P. A. - 6 - HERMAN & MERMELSTE1N, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff 18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Tel: Fax: EFTA00175832 • Case 9:08-cv-uu380-MM Document 49 Entereit.. an FLSD Docket 0,.2/2008 Page 7 of 8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on September 22, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CWECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day to all parties 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 parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing. /s/ Jeffrey M. Herman HERMAN 5. MERMELSTEIN, P. A. - 7 - EFTA00175833 • Case 9:08-cy-u,.,380-KAM Document 49 Enterer. n FLSD Docket 09,1/2008 Page 8 of 8 SERVICE LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Jack er Esq. Michael R. Tein, . Robert D. Critton Es . Michael Pike Es . /s/ Jeffrey M. Herman HERMAN & MERMELSTEIN. P. A. - 8 - EFTA00175834