Victim Civil (S.D. Fla.) — 08-cv-80994

Case 08-cv-80994 was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida by a plaintiff proceeding pseudonymously as 'Jane Doe No. 6' against Jeffrey Epstein. The earliest native filing in the corpus is a one-page Certification and Order of Transfer to Magistrate Judge dated October 8, 2008 (EFTA02742602), which transferred the case from Judge Daniel T. K. Hurley to U.S. District Judge Kenneth A. Marra and Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson — placing 08-cv-80994 alongside the other federal Florida Doe suits already pending before the same judicial pair.

The action belongs to a wave of substantially similar Jane Doe civil suits filed against Epstein in S.D. Fla. during 2008–2009. By 2009, the cases were administratively consolidated for discovery purposes, and filings in 08-cv-80994 routinely carry multi-case captions naming the related actions: 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, and 09-81092 (e.g., EFTA02743035, EFTA02746064). A 2018 SDNY case-tracking spreadsheet prepared by an Assistant U.S. Attorney later catalogued the federal disposition of every Florida Doe suit and listed 08-cv-80994 as 'settled' (EFTA00078630).

These suits arose directly out of the September 2007 federal non-prosecution agreement (NPA) between the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida and Epstein, which deferred federal charges while Epstein pleaded guilty to two state offenses in Palm Beach County. A March 25, 2009 affidavit by Epstein's criminal defense attorney Jack A. Goldberger, filed in this case as Document 23-2 (EFTA02742681), describes the NPA's mechanics, states that 'by its terms, the NPA took effect on June 30, 2008,' and asserts that the U.S. Attorney's Office had taken the position that contesting damages or investigating plaintiffs in the parallel civil suits could constitute a breach of the NPA — a posture Epstein then used to seek a stay of civil discovery.

The corpus filings show 08-cv-80994 progressing through a contested discovery phase: Epstein's motion to stay or continue based on the NPA (opposed at EFTA02742792, Doc 30, April 2009), motions to compel interrogatory and document responses, third-party deposition disputes (including a protective-order motion by Epstein's bodyguard, EFTA02743144, Doc 84, November 2009), and an Epstein motion for summary judgment filed May 6, 2010 (CM/ECF notice at EFTA00207372). Latest native captioned filings in the sample are dated June 14, 2010 (EFTA02743302). The corpus does not contain a settlement agreement, a final order of dismissal, or the original complaint for 08-cv-80994.

The DOJ corpus contains 456 EFTA-stamped pages and 39 emails linked to 08-cv-80994. The bulk are court filings under the 9:08-cv-80994-KAM caption and parallel docket entries from the consolidated sister cases, where 08-cv-80994 is one of the listed related actions on the multi-case caption page. Document types in the sample include the October 2008 transfer order assigning the case to Judge Marra (EFTA02742602), Goldberger's NPA-mechanics affidavit (EFTA02742681), Plaintiffs' opposition to Epstein's motion to stay or continue the action pending resolution of the federal criminal investigation (EFTA02742792), Plaintiffs' opposition to Epstein's motion to compel interrogatory responses inquiring into prior sexual history (EFTA02739836), a protective-order motion by Epstein's driver and bodyguard Igor Zinoview against being deposed (EFTA02743144), a related-case plaintiff's notice withdrawing a subpoena directed at a third-party fact witness scheduled for deposition in June 2010 (EFTA02743302), and a CM/ECF notice for Epstein's May 6, 2010 motion for summary judgment in this case (EFTA00207372).

A defense-firm internal billing memorandum from Critton, Burman & Coleman to Rich Kahn (Epstein's office) dated March 2010 (EFTA01076473) appears in the production and provides a window into how Epstein's civil defense was funded and tracked across the consolidated suits. The corpus also contains a 2018 SDNY AUSA spreadsheet (EFTA00078630) that lists every Florida Doe case and marks 08-cv-80994 as 'settled,' documenting the case's eventual disposition. Several filings appear in the corpus because they were re-filed years later as exhibits in downstream litigation — for example, the U.S. Virgin Islands' 22-cv-10904 case against JPMorgan and Giuffre v. Maxwell (15-cv-7433, S.D.N.Y.) — which is how some of these pages entered the DOJ production. The corpus does not include the underlying complaint, the settlement agreement, or any final judgment for 08-cv-80994.