Page 11 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139535, * Here, the information requested concerns Epstein's dates of travel, health care provider identification, and list of phone numbers. This information is relevant in that it may lead to evidence to support Plaintiffs claims that Epstein lured her to his mansion for the purpose of sexual exploitation. Substantively, the interrogatories are narrowly tailored to discover only information that is directly relevant to Plaintiffs claims and/or Epstein's defenses. Epstein's HIPAA objections are unfounded as the request seeks only the identification of Epstein's health care providers.' 1 In addressing Interrogatory 8, both parties refer to the need for the Court to hold an in camera inspection of the documents to determine. as to each docurnent. whether Fla. Stat. §39.204 is applicable. The request at issue. however, is an INTERROGATORY request. not a document request. and therefore these concerns are inapplicable. Finally, the requested ten-year time frame is not overly broad considering the allegation that Epstein has a psychosexual condition, which, if true, could very well have existed most, if not all, of his adult life. The Court agrees with Epstein, however, that Plaintiffs allegation of child abuse, does not alone provide Plaintiff r23] with carte blanche access to a list of ALL of Defendant's medical providers. Instead, the undersigned limits the interrogatory to a request for "identification, by name, title and address and/or telephone number, of all of Epstein's psychologists, psychiatrists, therapists, or mental health counselors for the last ten years." Accordingly, except as mentioned above with respect to health care professionals, the Court finds Epstein's objections to Interrogatories 7, 8 and 12 unfounded and orders Epstein to provide responses to same in accordance with the afore-stated terms, within ten (10) days from the date hereof. PRODUCTION REQUESTS As noted previously, the Fifth Amendmen