Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6351 Filed 04/09/18 Page 1 of 27 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION IN RE: CASE NO. 09-34791-RBR ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER, E., CHAPTER 11 Debtor. JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO FARMER. JAFFE, ET AL.'S MOTION FOR ISSUANCE OF AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY FOWLER WHITE AND JEFFREY EPSTEIN SHOULD NOT BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT, TO PERMIT DISCOVERY, TO ASSESS SANCTIONS AND COSTS, AND FOR OTHER APPROPRIATE RELIEF Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein")' responds individually in opposition to the Motion for Issuance of an Order to Show Cause Why Fowler White and Jeffrey Epstein Should Not be Held in Contempt of Court, to Permit Discovery, to Assess Sanctions and Costs, and for Other Appropriate Relief filed by Fanner, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards & Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. ("Farmer Jaffe") (D.E. 6326) and the Joinder filed by Interested Party Bradley Edwards ("Edwards") (D.E. 6325). PRELIMINARY STATEMENT As both Farmer Jaffe and Edwards well knew before filing and joining the Motion to Show Cause, Epstein does not have and has never had the disc, or any copy thereof, that is the subject of their Motion. In fact, neither Fanner Jaffe nor Edwards make any such assertions against Epstein. Instead, they level speculative allegations against Fowler White as to a matter of which Epstein had absolutely no knowledge and over which he could not possibly have had any control. An assessment of sanctions against Epstein or any other relief for something Fowler White may or may not have done, without his knowledge or consent, is wholly inappropriate. 'Fowler White Burnett, ■. ("Fowler White") has retained its own counsel. EFTA00808869