Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta01098083DOJ Data Set 9Other

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 144 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2012 Page 1 of 4

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
efta-efta01098083
Pages
4
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 144 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2012 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS' PROTECTIVE MOTION FOR REMEDIES The United States, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby responds to the Petitioners' Protective Motion for Remedies. In their Protective Motion for Remedies, Petitioners "ask[] the Court to award all the[] remedies that they outline in their responses to the [government's] motion to dismiss." DE 128 at 1-2. Petitioners further contend that "[t]he Court should award all of these remedies to the victims for the reasons explained in their pleadings and because these remedies address the Government's violation of their rights." Id. at 2. As a threshold matter, Petitioners' Protective Motion for Remedies should be denied because no such motion is cognizable under the Crime Victims Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3771, or under any rules of Court, and because the motion fails to "incorporate a memorandum of law citing supporting authorities," as required by Rule 7.1(a)(1) of the Local Rules. S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1(a)(1). Indeed, although Petitioners refer to their "response to the Government's motion to dismiss and sealed response to the Government's motion to dismiss," DE 128 at 1, neither of those filings contains citation to authority that even purports to furnish specific support for any EFTA01098083 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 144 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2012 Page 2 of 4 of the myriad of remedies listed in those documents, except for the requested remedy that the Court cancel or rescind a non-prosecution agreement. In any event, the United States denies that Petitioners are entitled to any of the remedies that they identify in either their response to the government's motion to dismiss or their sealed supplemental response to the motion to dismiss. For reasons that include those set forth in the United States' Sealed Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Sealed Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, both of which the United States hereby incorporates into this response, the remedies identified by Petitioners are unavailable to them in these proceedings pursuant to the CVRA. WHEREFORE the United States respectfully requests that this Court enter an order denying the Petitioners' Protective Motion for Remedies. 2 EFTA01098084 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 144 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2012 Page 3 of 4 Respectfully submitted, WIFREDO A. FERRER UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: s/ Eduardo 1. Sanchez Dexter A. Lee Assistant United States Attorney Florida Bar No. 0936693 99 E. 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132 Tel: Ema Eduardo I. Sanchez Assistant United States Attorney Florida Bar No. 877875 99 E. 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132 Tel: Ema A. Marie Villafafla Assistant United States Attorney Florida Bar No. 0018255 500 S. Australian Avenue, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Attorneys for Respondent CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing United States' Response to Petitioners' Protective Motion for Remedies was filed with the Clerk of the Court and served on counsel on the attached list using CM/ECF. d Eduardo 1. Sanchez Assistant United States Attorney 3 EFTA01098085 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 144 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2012 Page 4 of 4 SERVICE LIST Jane Does 1 and 2 v. United States, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Brad Edwards, Esq., Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, ■. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Paul G. Cassell S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, Utah 84112 Attorneys for Jane Doe # 1 and Jane Doe # 2 4 EFTA01098086

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Case #9:08-CV-80736-KAM

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 217 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/13/2010 Page 1 of 7

7p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subjec

Fr • < > Subjec :Deliberative t Process ec aratton rom am Justice - equest or wo ee xtension Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 17:59:47 +0000 Importance: Normal We have no objection, provided we get the following accommodation, which you already anticipated. We would request that your motion for extension of time give us an extension on our reply document, such that our reply would be due 10 days after the main Justice Department declaration that will be coming in two weeks. If you would include such language as well in any proposed order, saving us (and the court) drafting time, that would be very much appreciated. Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 Paul G Cassell CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message along with any/all attachments is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message

2p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 0372172011 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 1. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR ORDER DIRECTING THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE NOT TO WITHHOLD RELEVANT EVIDENCE COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to move for an order from this Court directing the U.S. Attorney's Office not to suppress material evidence relevant to this case. The Court should enter an order, as it would in other criminal or civil cases, requiring the Government to make appropriate production of such evidence to the victims. BACKGROUND In discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office about this case, counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 inquired about whether the Office would voluntarily provide to the victims information in its possession that was mater

15p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 0372112011 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 v. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR ORDER DIRECTING THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE NOT TO WITHHOLD RELEVANT EVIDENCE COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to move for an order from this Court directing the U.S. Attorney's Office not to suppress material evidence relevant to this case. The Court should enter an order, as it would in other criminal or civil cases, requiring the Government to make appropriate production of such evidence to the victims. BACKGROUND In discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office about this case, counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 inquired about whether the Office would voluntarily provide to the victims information in its possession that was mater

15p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 013-80736-Civ-Marra/Nlatthewman JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. DECLARATION OF IN SUPPORT OF GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE AND OPPOSITION TO PETITIONERS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Florida. I also am admitted to practice in all courts of the states of Minnesota and Florida, the Eighth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. District Courts for the Southern District of Florida, the District of Minnesota, and the Northern District of California. My bar admission status in California and Minnesota is currently inactive. I am currently employed as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of Florida and was so employed during all of the events described herein. 2. I am the Assistant United States Attorne

5p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

STATEMENT BY ALAN DERSHOWITZ

3p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.