EFTA00214072.pdf

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 206 Entered on FLSD Docket 0716/2009 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 3, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 4, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, VS. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, EFTA00214072 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 206 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2009 Page 2 of 4 Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 6, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 7, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, 2 EFTA00214073 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 206 Entered on FLSD Docket 07:16:2009 Page 3 of 4 Defendants. DOE II, CASE NO.: 09- 80469-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, Defendants. JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09- 80591-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 102 CASE NO.: 09- 80656-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Defendant" or "Epstein")'s renewed Motion to Stay (DE 65 in 08-80119). The Court held a hearing on the 3 EFTA00214074 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 206 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/16/2009 Page 4 of 4 Motion on June 12, 2009. The Court has reviewed the motion, responses, and replies where filed, and is otherwise fully advised in the premesis. The Court previously entered an Order denying Defendant's motion to stay, and the Court incorporates by reference its previous Order. See DE 33 in 08-80119, entered August 5, 2008. Defendant's renewed motion alleges that the civil actions filed against Defendant should be stayed because Epstein's defense of the civil actions violates the Non-Prosecution Agreement between Epstein and the United States (the "NPA"). The Court has reviewed the NPA in camera. The Court has also considered argument from counsel and representations from the United States on the matter. Based upon the representations of the United States, Epstein's proceeding in the normal course of defending the civil actions will not constitute a breach of the NPA. To the extent that the NPA limits the actions Epstein may take in defending these cases, he is aware of those limitations and can conduct himself accordingly. Thus, the Court sees no reason to modify its earlier ruling. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion to Stay (DE 65 in 08-80119) is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 16th day of July, 2009 / ern KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge Copies furnished to: all counsel of record 4 EFTA00214075