Court records
- Format
- Set
- Court Records
- Text
- Searchable
Text as released
Machine-read from the scan. Names, dates and numbers can be misread — check anything you rely on against the original page.
Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 21 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/18/2009 Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 09-CIV- 80591 - KAM
JANE DOE NO. 101,
Plaintiff,
V.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
_____________/
DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION
FOR DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED
COMPLAINT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE. FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT
Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, moves
to exceed the page limitation of 20 pages imposed by Loe. Gen. Rule 7.1. C. 2. (S.D.
Fla.), in his memorandum of law in support of his motion to dismiss directed to Plaintiff
JANE DOE No. 101 's First Amended Complaint [DE 9], dated May 1, 2009. In support
of his motion, Defendant states:
1. Local Gen. Rule 7.1 C. 2. provides in part that absent prior permission of the
court, no party shall file any legal memorandum exceeding 20 pages in length.
Defendant is in the process of preparing his motion to dismiss and alternative motion for
more definite statement, and his supporting memorandum of law directed to Plaintiff's
First Amended Complaint. (Defendant's response to the First Amended Compalint is
due May 26, 2009). The legal memorandum will exceed the 20 page limitation. It is
clear based on the issues raised in Plaintiff's complaint that in excess of 20 pages is
required to fully and adequately discuss the issues raised in moving to dismiss Plaintiff's
action.
Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 21 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/18/2009 Page 2 of 3
Jane Doe 11 v. Epstein, et al.
Page 2
2. The issues being addressed pertain to the interpretation and application of 18
U.S.C. §2255. Some of these issues include but are not limited to constitutional law
i
[…]