Becka's SLAPP suit, CIO vs. Bloomberg -- is the fat lady ready to sing?
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
The opposition of plaintiff Computerized Thermal Imaging, Inc. ("CTI") to Bloomberg L.P.'s ("Bloomberg's") Motion to Dismiss only confirms Bloomberg's showing that CTI fails to state a libel claim. CTI relies on inapplicable and outdated law in some parts, completely avoids appropriate Utah law in yet other parts, and resorts to unfounded ad hominem attacks on the Bloomberg reporter who wrote the articles in question. Moreover, CTI appears to have abandoned several aspects of its Complaint and theory of recovery. The remaining aspects are equally flawed.
CTI effectively concedes that the majority of the statements at issue are protected opinion or fair comment and therefore not actionable as a matter of law. As to the remaining two statements, CTI's own pleading reveals the truth of the underlying factual assertions. In addition, CTI egregiously misreads Utah law with regard to defamatory meaning and libel per se, and never once addresses Utah's application of the innocent construction rule. CTI's Opposition also makes an unclear and unfounded attempt to rewrite Utah's law on special damages, and in so doing, relies solely on a speculative and legally insufficient claim that the articles in question damaged CTI because they contributed to a drop in the market price ofCTI's stock. For the reasons raised in Bloomberg's Motion to Dismiss and articulated below, this Court should dismiss the Complaint in its entirety.
That was page 2 of this document, which I highly recommend:
pacer.utd.uscourts.gov
This document is Bloomberg's latest court filing, on Jan. 9, in its effort to dismiss the case.
There was a hearing scheduled for Friday Feb. 2 on Bloomberg's motion to dismiss. Pacer doesn't yet show the result of this hearing. Whenever it does show up, it will likely have this URL: pacer.utd.uscourts.gov |
