EFTA00194709 # KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP AND AFFILIATED PARTNERSHIPS Jay P. Lefkowitz, P.C. To Call Writer Directly: lefkowitz@kirkland.com Citigroup Center 153 East 53rd Street New York, New York 10022-4611 www.kirkland.com Facsimile: June 15, 2009 ## VIA FACSIMILE Ms. A. Marie Villafana, Esq. United States Attorney’s Office Southern District of Florida 500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Re: Jeffrey Epstein ## Dear Marie: I am attaching a letter authored by my co-counsel, Robert Critton, on today’s date. It represents our agreement with a proposal that Kathy Ezell indicated in a letter dated June 8, 2009 would be fully acceptable to her and Bob Josefsberg as a means to resolve expeditiously all outstanding fee issues regarding the attorney representative. Mr. Epstein has directed his counsel to take immediate steps to address and resolve the attorney representative’s outstanding fee-related issues and we are doing so without delay. The suggestion of a Special Master, agreed to by both parties, to resolve the issues in the immediate future, will assure all parties that there will be no delay and no need for adversarial litigation regarding fees. More generally, I want to assure you that Mr. Epstein has directed all counsel to make sure that there is no filing that could constitute a breach of the NPA. Accordingly, a new internal screening process has been established to provide focused decision-making on each filing. To the extent we believe any filing may be perceived as implicating any of the issues generically addressed in the NPA (a document including sentences within paragraph 8 that even Mr. Acosta agreed were “far from simple”), we intend to address such issues with you prior to any filing and hope that you will agree to review the draft filing and inform us whether or not from your perspective it would, if filed, constitute a “breach”. This will be especially important regarding issues that we believe fall at the intersection of Section 2255 and the civil litigation. We reserve our right, if you believe a proposed filing to conflict with the NPA or if you wish not to address these issues with us, thereafter to address such substantive issues with the Court.
ChicagoHong KongLondonLos AngelesMunichSan FranciscoWashington, D.C.
EFTA00194710 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Ms. A. Marie Villafana, Esq. June 15, 2009 We hope that these proposals—in combination with our immediate withdrawal of the previously filed Motion to Dismiss—resolve all outstanding issues at the intersection of the NPA and 2255. Please advise if any remain. Sincerely, Jay P. Lefkowitz Enclosure cc: Karen Atkinson, Esq.