Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch7_p00227.png

20 Za 22 23 24 25 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1332-10 Filed 01/08/24 Page 30 of 64 29 H2G8GIUC Steinhilber case, requires the application of those four so-called Omen factors. I call them the Steinhilber factors because Steinhilber adopted the four factors in the D.C. Circuit Omen case. And these factors, your Honor, all come our way. The plaintiff loses on the question of opinion as well. On the question of indefiniteness and the ambiguity, the Court brought out the point earlier about, well, what is meant by the word allegations used twice in the first paragraph. First, allegations without an adjective, and then the second time, original allegations. What is meant by that? Well, here is the indefiniteness and the ambiguity, Judge, that comes right into play. The plaintiff is facing an insurmountable problem, both at trial against the 80 witnesses and in the summary judgment motion, because they are trying to establish that every allegation ever made by the plaintiff is true, and provably true. So here they are chasing windmills trying to prove that every allegation the plaintiff has ever made is true. It can't be done, and I am going to talk a little bit more about that in a moment as far as why it cannot be done. For now I just wanted to talk about the indefiniteness and the ambiguity. The third statement in the January 2015 statement, the third sentence that is the subject of the complaint, paragraph 30, is Mr. Barton's statement in paragraph 3 that plaintiff's claims are "obvious lies." Well, we don't know what, quote SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300