DS9 Document EFTA00623124

0 Matins Klugman/New York/Kirkland-Ellis 09/22/200912:40 PM To Michelle Denny/New YorkflOrkland-alls@K&E cc bee Subject Fvr Please see the attached letter. Forwarded by Kristin Andersen/New York/Kirkland-Ellis on 0922/200912:26 PM — Jay Lefkowitz/New York/Kirkland-Ellis Sent by: Courtney D.E. Smith/New York/Kirkland-Ells 06/12/2009 04:17 PM I To CC Subject Please see the attached letter. lelkovalr toWotan/IOC 12 2009.POF Notice of Withdrawripdf EFTA00623124 6 Jay P. Lenans4O., P.C. To . KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP AND AMLIATID PAIIMIOSNWS Cit!group Ceder 153 EMI 53rd Sven New Yak, New York 100224611 June 12, 2009 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Ms. A. Marie Villafana, Esq. United States Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida 500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Ms. Villafana, Faosknly I am in possession of your June 12, 2009 letter giving notice of breach. I respectfully submit that the Motion to Dismiss that is referenced therein did not constitute a will breach of Mr. Epstein's obligations under the non-prosecution agreement. Mr. Epstein's counsel unanimously determined that the filing of this Motion to Dismiss was not a breach of the non- prosecution agreement, and the Motion to Dismiss was filed by counsel without Mr. Epstein's final approval. I want to inform you that immediately upon receipt of your letter, Mr. Epstein directed his counsel to file the attached Notice withdrawing all but issue number VIII of the previously filed Motion to Dismiss. The same issue also is described briefly in subparagraph D on page 3 of the Motion, which likewise was not withdrawn. Please note that this issue relates exclusively to the damages available under § 2255. The Notice has already been filed. If your continued review of the civil dockets causes you to have additional concerns about any other filing, consistent with the notice provisions of the non-prosecution agreement and consistent with our prior practice regarding such matters, please provide me with notice and the opportunity to address the same with you. I believe that with today's filing withdrawing these issues Mr. Epstein, through counsel, has fully remedied any perceived breach. Please advise if you for any reason disagree. Respectfully submitted, Jay P. Le owiiz, P.C. Chicago Hong Kong London Los Angolan Munch San Frandsoo Washington. 0.C. EFTA00623125 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP CC: Jeffrey Sloman, Esq. Karen Atkinson, Esq. O EFTA00623126 Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/12/2009 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 09-CIV- 80591 - KAM JANE DOB NO. 101, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT jmEmELE THROUGH VII OF THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (DE291 Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby withdraws arguments I through VII as set forth in the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (FAC) [DE 29), dated May 26, 2009. Defendant withdraws his arguments contained subparagraphs A, B, C and Sections 1 (The Complaint Must Be Dismissed Because Plaintiff Is Not A Minor). II (The FAC Must Be Dismissed Because The Defendant Has Not Been Convicted Of A Predicate Offense), DI (Count One Of The FAC Must Be Dismissed Because It Does Not Please A Violation Of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b)), IV (Count Two Must Be Dismissed Because It Does Not Plead A Violation Of 18 U.S.C. §2423(b)), V (Count Three Must Bo Dismissed Because It Does Not Plead A Violation Of 18 US.C. § 2251, VI (Counts Four and Five Must Be Dismissed Because They Do Not Plead Violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(1) Or 2252(a)(1), and VII (Count Six Must Be Dismissed Because 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(g) Was Not Enacted Until 2006). Defendant will rely only on those arguments set forth in subparagraph D, on page 3, and Paragraph VIII (Any Surviving Count Should Be Merged Into A Single Count) of the EFTA00623127 Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/12/2009 Page 2 of 2 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint Or, In The Alternative, For A More Definite Statement PE 29) dated May 26, 2009. Counsel fora dant 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 si record entified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CMJECF on thieaay of 2009 Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Hagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 W IMP ounsel for Plaintiff 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 Respectfully submitted By: ROBERT D ITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida B o. 224162 rcrit@bc law.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 BURMAN, CRITTON, LurnER & COLEMAN 515 N. Hagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) EFTA00623128