DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p02015.png

Case 18-2868, Document 287, 08/09/2019, 2628251, Page67 of 76 audience for a press release is the public. The motion to dismiss opinion clearly addressed this issue: Sexual assault of a minor is a clear-cut issue; either transgression occurred or it did not. Either Maxwell was involved or she was not. The issue is not a matter of opinion, and there cannot be differing understandings of the same facts that justify diametrically opposed opinion as to whether Maxwell was involved in Giuffre’s abuse as Giuffre has claimed. Either Giuffre is telling the truth about her story and Maxwell’s involvement, or Maxwell is telling the truth and she was not involved in the trafficking and ultimate abuse of Giuffre. Giuffre, 165 F. Supp. at 152. Maxwell has urged that these conclusions at the motion to dismiss stage should be revisited and revised when considering the summary judgment motion since the standard for deciding a Rule 12(b) (6) motion is different from the standard for deciding a Rule 56 motion. In deciding a 12(b) (6) motion, the court must accept as true the factual allegations and draw all inferences in the plaintiff’s favor; a plaintiff need only state a claim that is “plausible on its face.” Id. at 149 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). In contrast, for a Rule 56 motion, the plaintiff defending the motion may not “rest on [the] allegations” in her complaint. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249. 67