EFTA00209534Set 9
2013-07-1225p5,708w
Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, 516 F.3d 1235
(11th Cir. 2008) 18
Mohawk Industries, Inc.. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009) passim
Overby,. U.S. Fidelity & Guar. Co., 224 F.2d ... Perlman I. United States, 247 U.S. 7 (1918); contrary to plaintiffs'
arguments, nothing in Mohawk Industries, Inc.. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009),
undercuts the Court's exercise of Perlman ... Intervenors did not, however, ignore
controlling Supreme Court precedent, for the simple reason that Mohawk Industries,
Inc. I. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), does not affect the right
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00209534.pdf
EFTA01072169Set 9
2013-07-1225p5,750w
Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, 516 F.3d 1235
(11th Cir. 2008) 18
Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009) passim
Overby v. U.S. Fidelity & Guar ... Perlman v. United States, 247 U.S. 7 (1918); contrary to plaintiffs'
arguments, nothing in Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009),
undercuts the Court's exercise of Perlman ... Intervenors did not, however, ignore
controlling Supreme Court precedent, for the simple reason that Mohawk Industries,
Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), does not affect the right
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01072169.pdf
EFTA00209465Set 9
2013-07-1225p5,673w
Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, 516 F.3d 1235
(11th Cir. 2008) 18
Mohawk Industries, Inc.. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009) passim
Overby,. U.S. Fidelity & Guar. Co., 224 F.2d ... Perlman I. United States, 247 U.S. 7 (1918); contrary to plaintiffs'
arguments, nothing in Mohawk Industries, Inc.. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009),
undercuts the Court's exercise of Perlman ... Intervenors did not, however, ignore
controlling Supreme Court precedent, for the simple reason that Mohawk Industries,
Inc. I. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), does not affect the right
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00209465.pdf
EFTA00209567Set 9
2007-09-2428p5,531w
Indians of Florida I United States, 516 F.3d 1235,
1265 (11th Cir. 2008) 21
Mohawk Industries, Inc. I. Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009) passim
Nat'l Super Spuds ... discovery ruling at this time. Under the
Supreme Court's recent decision in Mohawk Industries, m a' Carpenter, 130 S.
Ct. 599 (2009), it is clear that someone (like Epstein ... privilege
can be immediately appealed, the Supreme Court has recently concluded
otherwise. In Mohawk Industries, Inc.' Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009), the
Supreme Court affirmed this Circuit and rejected
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00209567.pdf
EFTA00209355Set 9
2007-09-2428p5,591w
Indians of Florida v. United States, 516 F.3d 1235,
1265 (11th Cir. 2008) 21
Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009) passim
Nat'l Super Spuds ... discovery ruling at this time. Under the
Supreme Court's recent decision in Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 130 S.
Ct. 599 (2009), it is clear that someone (like Epstein ... privilege
can be immediately appealed, the Supreme Court has recently concluded
otherwise. In Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009), the
Supreme Court affirmed this Circuit
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00209355.pdf
EFTA01128707Set 9
2013-07-0228p5,886w
Indians of Florida v. United States, 516 F.3d 1235,
1265 (11th Cir. 2008) 21
Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009) passim
Nat'l Super Spuds ... discovery ruling at this time. Under the
Supreme Court's recent decision in Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 130 S.
Ct. 599 (2009), it is clear that someone (like Epstein ... privilege
can be immediately appealed, the Supreme Court has recently concluded
otherwise. In Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009), the
Supreme Court affirmed this Circuit
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01128707.pdf
EFTA01072088Set 9
2013-07-1613p2,541w
such an interlocutory appeal
in light of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Mohawk Industries, Inc. v.
Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009) (attorney-client privilege ruling not immediately ... APPEAL UNDER
MOHAWK.
This Court should also immediately dismiss Epstein's interlocutory appeal
under Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009). In response to
the victims' reliance
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01072088.pdf
EFTA00209494Set 9
13p2,264w
such an interlocutory appeal
in light of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Mohawk Industries, Inc.'.
Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009) (attorney-client privilege ruling not immediately
appealable ... APPEAL UNDER
MOHAWK.
This Court should also immediately dismiss Epstein's interlocutory appeal
under Mohawk Industries, Inc. I Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009). In response to
the victims' reliance
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00209494.pdf
EFTA00209657Set 9
2013-08-0575p16,720w
Missouri v. Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399 (2012) 12, 35,36
Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009) 46, 47, 48,
49, 51
EFTA00209664
Case: 13-12923 Date ... Perlman Doctrine in
this Case.
In their Motion to Dismiss, plaintiffs argued that Mohawk Industries, Inc. v.
Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), superceded Perlman and eliminated any basis for
this
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00209657.pdf
EFTA00583760Set 9
2008-07-1120p5,068w
Perlman v. United States, 247 U.S. 7 (1918); contrary to
plaintiffs' arguments, nothing in Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S.
100 (2009), undercuts the Court's exercise of Perhnan ... Intervenors did not,
however, ignore controlling Supreme Court precedent, for the simple reason that
Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), does not affect the
right
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00583760.pdf
EFTA00584603Set 9
2008-07-1121p5,110w
United States, 247 U.S. 7 (1918), and, contrary
to plaintiffs' arguments, nothing in Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558
U.S. 100 (2009), undercuts the Court's exercise of Perlman jurisdiction ... Intervenors did not,
however, ignore controlling Supreme Court precedent, for the simple reason that
Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), does not affect the
4 See Intervenors
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00584603.pdf
EFTA01128656Set 9
2013-07-129p1,642w
Epstein's interlocutory appeal, explaining that this Court lacked jurisdiction in
light of Mohawk Industries v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009). That motion is also
fully briefed and also remains ... litigants] if the appellate courts do not repeatedly intervene
to second-guess prejudgment rulings." Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558
U.S. 100, 106 (2009) (internal citations omitted). The victims respectfully
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01128656.pdf
EFTA00209507Set 9
2013-07-1923p4,943w
interlocutory appeal, explaining that this Court lacked
6
EFTA00209513
jurisdiction in light of Mohawk Industries'. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009).
On June 26, 2013, Epstein sought a stay ... litigants] if the
appellate courts do not repeatedly intervene to second-guess prejudgment rulings."
Mohawk Industries, Inc.' Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100, 106 (2009) (internal citations
omitted).
This Court has repeatedly
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00209507.pdf
EFTA01071961Set 9
2013-08-3071p17,109w
Florida v. United States, 516 F.3d 1235,
1265 (11th Cir. 2008) 12, 17
Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009) 14
MSTG, Inc., 675 F.3d ... jump into the middle of a District
Court discovery dispute. The Supreme Court in Mohawk Industries, Inc. v.
Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009), cautioned that "the district judge
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01071961.pdf
EFTA01134321Set 9
2013-06-1858p13,086w
Doctrine
in this Case.
45
EFTA01134365
In their Motion to Dismiss, plaintiffs argued that Mohawk Industries, Inc. v.
Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), superceded Perlman and eliminated any basis
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01134321.pdf
EFTA01072194Set 9
2013-06-1858p13,073w
Doctrine
in this Case.
45
EFTA01072238
In their Motion to Dismiss, plaintiffs argued that Mohawk Industries, Inc. v.
Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), superceded Perlman and eliminated any basis
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01072194.pdf
EFTA00583454Set 9
13p3,972w
Intervenors did not, however, ignore controlling Supreme Court precedent, for the simple
reason that Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), does not affect the
intervenors' ability
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00583454.pdf
EFTA00583780Set 9
15p4,660w
Intervenors did not, however, ignore controlling Supreme Court precedent, for the simple
reason that Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009), does not affect the
intervenors' ability
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00583780.pdf
EFTA01143529Set 9
2013-06-2817p4,700w
interlocutory appeals are proper, the Supreme Court has recently and flatly concluded otherwise.
In Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 130 S.Ct. 599 (2009), an opinion that immediately
appears when performing
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01143529.pdf
EFTA01098146Set 9
2013-06-2817p4,747w
interlocutory appeals are proper, the Supreme Court has recently and flatly concluded otherwise.
In Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 130 S.Ct. 599 (2009), an opinion that immediately
appears when performing
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01098146.pdf