IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN'tsit.a.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN'tsit.a. DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS & ST. JOHN ) JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) NO. ST-10-CV-443 ) FANCELLI PANELING, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) (CARROLL, J.) ) DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED REPLY WITH POINTS AND AUTHORITIES COMES NOW Defendant, FANCELLI PANELING, INC. ("Fanelli"), by and through its undersigned counsel, to move this Honorable Court for its Ordergranting Defendant in this action leave to file an Amended Reply, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7, 12 & IS, LRCI 7.1(d), Super. Ct. Rules 7, 48 U.S.C. §1561 and the Constitutional considerations embodied therein. In support of its Motion, Defendant states the following facts and circumstances: 1. Defendant incorporates by reference the matter contained in its May 10° Motion to Extend Time to File Leave to File Out of Time and in its May 14° Motion for Leave to File (Amended) Reply Out of Time (nunc pro tune)) Although the Amended Reply is 21 pages, the Court has previously granted leave to exceed the page limit and that Order is applicable hereto. LRCi 12.1(d). EFTA01098979 DEPENDANT'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED REPLY &stein. et al. v. Fancelli Page 2 2. In filing its Amended Reply May I Counsel then considered its jurisdictional challenges to the pleadings pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(6)(1-6), subject to a first time permissible amendment as a matter of course and without need of leave, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(2)(1). Counsel raised those specific objections by motion, as permitted by Rule 12(b). A jurisdictional motion is not within the definition of pleading provided by Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a), but several of its jurisdictional challenges must be initially raised in direct response to this pleading, the First Amended Complaint, upon pain of waiver and before pleading further. Rule 12(g)(2) & (k). 3. In reviewing the interaction of rules and time limits between the Courts from a less hectic vantage yesterday, Counsel noted that leave of Court is required for filings subsequent to the reply in local motions practice. LRCi 7.1(a). 4. Accordingly, counsel moves that the instant Motion be accepted. mine pro tune, to the May 10th & 14th Motions and/or the May 11ih filing of the Amended Reply and to accept it as filed. 5. Should the Court deem a sanction appropriate after considering the foregoing, counsel requests that it be exclusively his, for the least amount, pursuant to LRCi 11.2. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to grant the following relief: A. To Permit Defendant to amend its Reply, mine pro itinc; and B. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. EFTA01098980 DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED REPLY jpstein. et al. v. Fancelli Page 3 DATED this IS I day of March, 2011. Respectfully submitted, Treston MOOR DS SELL, P.C. V.I. Bar No. 10 Attorneys for Defendant P.O. Box 310 (14A Noire Gade) St. Thomas, VI 00804-0310 PHONE: FAX: EMAIL: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this ISth day of March, 2011, a copy of the foregoing was served by first class mail, postage prepaid, upon Denise Francois, Esquire, Hodge & Francois, #1340 Taameherg, St. Thomas, V.I. 00802. EFTA01098981 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN IS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS & ST. JOHN JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al., * * * * * ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) NO. ST-10-CV-443 ) FANCELLI PANELING, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) (CARROLL, J.) ) ORDER THIS MATTER comes on the Defendant's March 10, 2011 Motion to Extend Tinge in Which to Respond to the Court's Order to Show Cause, March 14, 2011 Motion for Leave to File its (Amended) Complaint Out of Time and the instant Motion for Leave to File Amended Reply (num pro tune) and it APPEARING TO THE COURT that said Motion should be granted for excusable neglect and/or good cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED that the Defendant's Amended Reply shall be accepted as filed March 11, 2011; and it is further ORDERED EFTA01098982 ORDER &stein. et al. v. FenceIli Page 2 ENTERED THIS I)AY OF , 2011: Hon. JAMES CARROLL, JUDGE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE V I. ATTEST: Venetia H. Velazquez, Esq. CLERK OF COURT By: (Deputy) clerk Distribution list: All Counsel of Record EFTA01098983