Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch2_p00290.png

10 11 L2 £3 14 15 16 EF 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1325-18 Filed 01/04/24 Page 5 of 23 G1ETGIUA As your Honor also found in Cruz v. Marchetto, you cannot rely, as the plaintiff tries to do here, on the less stringent pleading requirements that predated Twombly and Iqbal, and furthermore, that the plaintiff must plead facts which support either defamation per se or special damages. Here, your Honor, while there are statement fragments contained in the complaint at paragraph 31, there's not even a complete sentence attributed to my client, Ms. Maxwell. That, your Honor, has been found on numerous occasions to be insufficient to state a cause of action for defamation. Furthermore, the complaint does not state to whom any such statements were made. There is a general allegation that the statements were made, quote, to the media and public, but no media is identified, no publications are identified. While the complaint states at one point that it was published and disseminated around the world, not a single publication is mentioned or attached to the complaint. And furthermore, the complaint fails to state where in fact the statements were made. Although it does state the statements were made in the Southern District of New York, it attributes those sentence fragments to a press agent who is admittedly located in London. Finally, your Honor, there is a lot of confusion contained in the paperwork with regard to the standard of malice that must be pled. Again your Honor has found, and SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300