4, Edwards is Entitled to Summary Judgment to the Extent His Claim is Based On Pursuit of Discovery Concerning Epstein’s Friends Because All Such Efforts Were Reasonably Calculated to Lead to Relevant and Admissible Testimony About Epstein’s Abuse of Minor Girls. | Epstein has also alleged that Edwards improperly pursued discovery from some his close friends. Such discovery, Epstein claims, was improper because Edwards knew that these individuals lacked any discoverable information about the sexual assault cases against Epstein. - Here again, Edwards is entitled to summary judgment, as each of the friends of Epstein were reasonably believed to possess discoverable information. The undisputed facts show the following with regard to each of the persons raised in Epstein’s complaint: e With regard to Donald Trump, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing Mr. Trump had relevant and discoverable information. See Statement of Undisputed Facts. | e With regard to Alan Dershowitz (Harvard Law Professor), Edwards had sound legal basis for believing Mr. Dershowitz had relevant and discoverable . information. See Statement of Undisputed Facts. e With regard to former President Bill Clinton, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing former President Clinton had relevant and discoverable information. . See Statement of Undisputed Facts. | e With regard to former Sony Record executive Tommy Mottola, Edwards was not the attorney that noticed Mr. Mottola’s deposition. See Statement of Undisputed ; Facts. | e With regard to illusionist David Copperfield, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing Mr. Copperfield had relevant and discoverable information. See Statement of Undisputed Facts. e With regard to former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, Edwards had sound legal basis for naming Former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson on . his witness list. See Statement of Undisputed Facts. It is worth noting that the standard for discovery is a very libera