EFTA01091403Set 9
2009-04-3074p36,721w
itself against an eleventh-how defense is both obvious and legitimate," id. at 471 n.1,
"in the absence of a strong showing of state interests to the contrary, discovery must ... identity of victims.
United States v. Vaughn, slip op., 2008 WL 4615030 *2 n.1 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2008). "IA]
defendant has the right to test the government's evidence ... case like this one, where there are
many victims." Id. at 1014 n.1. One judge wrote separately to state that he doubted that a
"victim has an absolute right
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01091403.pdf
EFTA00204892Set 9
2011-12-0525p7,838w
challenge to the Court's subject matter
jurisdiction." Gov't Mot. Dismiss at 1 n.1. On this basis, the Government claims to be free to
raise extrinsic evidence outside ... complaint, "such as testimony and affidavits." Id. at 1.n.1
(citing Makro Capital of America, Inc. UBS AG, 543 F.3d 1254, 1258 (11th Cir. 1999)).
To the extent the Government ... binding as
precedent in the Eleventh Circuit." United States' Brown, 342 F.3d 1245, 1246 n.1 (11th Cir.
2003).
12
EFTA00204903
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 127 Entered
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00204892.pdf
EFTA01339329Set 10
23p12,127w
Vega.. NV 2.0 included 000 0.00
69 VIS çile, I'M \c; or:. N.1 1 co tat laded • 111X1 IIIIII
70 8/1.5 508 PM La, Vega,. NV 2.0 iacluJcd ... IlICILI4td : O 00 0,0u
371 X24 1.111 P M Sov Pork. N.1 20 included (14/11 000
,.' . &"4 2:42 P M NnY York. NY 2,0 : ILICIUdCd ... yorkind, NY 1.0 One! (I (XI 0410
515 820 40 A 1. New or N.1. In MC laded (I 00 Dun
546 8;0 gig A. Nc* York
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01339329.pdf
EFTA01125545Set 9
2009-03-1515p7,691w
prepare for it?" United States v. Vaughn, slip op., 2008 WL
4615030 *2-3 & n.1 (ED. Cal. Oct. 17, 2008) (ordering disclosure of names, addresses,
email addresses, and telephone numbers ... ability to participate in
the process. United States v. Hunter, 2008 WL 53125 *1 n.1 (D. Utah Jan. 3, 2008)
(Kimball, J.)
12
EFTA01125556
Victim's motion must "be made ... U.S.C. § 3771(d)(2).
Kenna v. United States District Court, 435 F.3d 1011, 1014 n.1 (9th Cir. 2006) (this
procedure for being "reasonably heard" "may well be appropriate
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01125545.pdf
EFTA00304742Set 9
2011-12-0525p7,975w
challenge to the Court's subject matter
jurisdiction." Gov't Mot. Dismiss at 1 n.1. On this basis, the Government claims to be free to
raise extrinsic evidence outside ... complaint, "such as testimony and affidavits." Id. at 1.n.1
(citing Makro Capital ofAmerica, Inc. v. UBS AG, 543 F.3d 1254, 1258 (11th Cir. 1999)).
To the extent the Government ... precedent in the Eleventh Circuit." United States v. Brown, 342 F.3d 1245, 1246 n.1 (11th Cir.
2003).
12
EFTA00304753
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 127 Entered on FLSD
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00304742.pdf
EFTA00812512Set 9
2011-12-0525p7,975w
challenge to the Court's subject matter
jurisdiction." Gov't Mot. Dismiss at 1 n.1. On this basis, the Government claims to be free to
raise extrinsic evidence outside ... complaint, "such as testimony and affidavits." Id. at 1.n.1
(citing Makro Capital ofAmerica, Inc. v. UBS AG, 543 F.3d 1254, 1258 (11th Cir. 1999)).
To the extent the Government ... precedent in the Eleventh Circuit." United States v. Brown, 342 F.3d 1245, 1246 n.1 (11th Cir.
2003).
12
EFTA00812523
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 127 Entered on FLSD
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00812512.pdf
EFTA00731431Set 9
2008-07-1066p17,583w
scope of the conflict. See. e.g.,
McEnderfer v. Keefe, 921 So. 2d 597, 597 n.1 (Fla. 2006) (declining to reach
issues "that were either not directly addressed by the district ... Amendments to the Fla. Evid. Code, 825 So. 2d 339, 340, 340 n.1
(Ha. 2002); Francis v. State
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00731431.pdf
EFTA00056410Set 9
2019-07-241000p140,118w
cifp
0 10300A -Vrfl Qczkeln \A(46 mk 011,15a/1 AO 01DP-141e
.true„n.1 NAci, 0 I ts ( 5 (41 \oe A -Scs,), \ocht4, ko
b\veA CA
oitqc
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00056410.pdf
EFTA01116869Set 9
81p40,653w
Establishing and
Drafting Offshore Asset Protection Trusts, EST. PLAN., Feb. 1996, at 65, 66 n.1; Marty-
Nelson, supra note 66, at 62; Lynn M. LoPucki, The Death of Liability
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01116869.pdf
EFTA00523380Set 9
2013-02-012p679w
DINNERFORK DUO TURQUOISE (QT) 6 9,00 0,00 9,00 54,00
CO N.1 CD CO -4 AWN)
DINNER KNIFE DUO TURQUOISE ... N.1 CD CO -4 AWN)
DINNER KNIFE DUO RED (RO) 6 13,00 0,00 13,00 78,00
TEA SPOON
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00523380.pdf
EFTA00613837Set 9
2014-01-277p1,676w
case at hand; argue that the Court ignore appellate court precedent. Id. at 973
n.1, 985. This Court correctly recognized that at the Summary Judgment hearing. See
Transcript of Motion ... decision of' an appellate court. System Components v. FDOT, 14 So. 3d 967,
973 n.1 (Fla. 2009). The appellate brief upon which Edwards relies was filed in a case
(Steinberg
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00613837.pdf
EFTA01407189Set 10
2016-10-12100p20,728w
plaintiff or would
constitute a complete defense." Buccolo, 308 Fed. Appx. 574, at n.1 (quoting
Poulis, 747
F.2d at 869-70). In this appeal, North Shore challenges the Bankruptcy
Division ... Poulis factor weighs in favor of dismissal. Cf.
Buccolo, 308 Fed.
Appx. 574, at n.1 ( [HN28] "[a] claim ... will be deemed meritorious when
the allegations ...
if established [], would support recovery
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01407189.pdf
EFTA00103380Set 9
2010-01-2136p11,826w
United States v. Stanton, No. 91 Cr. 889 (CHS), 1992 WL 27130 & n.1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 1992) 18
United States v. Stroh ... United States v. Stanton, No. 91 Cr. 889 (CHS), 1992
WL 27130, at *2 & n.1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 1992) (denying modification of defendant's bail where
defendant indicated willingness
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00103380.pdf
EFTA00078759Set 9
2004-06-284p2,130w
relating to whether they are enforceable, thereby rendering their consideration
meaningless.4
Id. at *3 n.1; cf. United States v. Vreeken 603 F. Supp. 715, 716 (D. Utah ... inconsequential in the analysis.'). See generally United States v. Cook, 442 F.2d 723, 724 n.1
(D.C. Cir. 1970) (rejecting, without discussion, execution of a waiver from any country
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00078759.pdf
EFTA00582761Set 9
2012-01-2510p3,117w
appellate court. See System Components v. FDOT, 14 So. 3d 967, 973 n.1 (Fla. 2009); see also
State a rel. Reynolds v. White, 24 So. 160, 315 (1898) ("Where ... appellate court. See System Components v. FDOT, 14 So. 3d 967, 973
n.1 (Fla. 2009).
Likewise, a trial court has the authority, upon a motion for rehearing, to "reopen
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00582761.pdf