MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Robert Huizenga (“Plaintiff”) brings this action against Defendants NYP Holdings, Inc. (“the Post”), Joelle Gwynn, and Does 1-20 for defamation and intentional interference with a prospective economic relationship. On February 26, 2018, Plaintiff filed the operative Second Amended Complaint. (Docket entry no. 41 (the “SAC”).) Defendant Gwynn now moves to dismiss the SAC pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Docket entry no. 49.) The Court has jurisdiction of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a). The Court has considered carefully the parties’ submissions in connection with the motion and, for the following reasons, Gwynn’s motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint is granted.BACKGROUNDThe following recitation of relevant facts is derived from the allegations in the SAC, the well-pleaded factual content of which is taken as true for purposes of this motion. The Court also considers the Post articles attached to the SAC which, as “documents attached to the complaint as an exhibit or incorporated in it by reference,” are properly considered in the context of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc., 282 F.3d 147, 153 (2d Cir. 2002).Plaintiff is a sports medicine doctor who appears on the television series “The Biggest Loser” (the “Show”). (SAC 1.) Plaintiff alleges that he is a “world renowned health expert” and “one of the most esteemed sports doctors of all time.” (Id. 1.) Defendant Gwynn is a former contestant on the Show. (Id. 2.) On May 19, 2016, a reporter for the Post contacted Plaintiff’s attorney for comment on statements made by Show contestants regarding, among other things, the alleged use of illegal drugs for rapid weight loss. (Id. 25.) The next day, Plaintiff’s attorney informed the Post reporter that the statements were false. (Id. 26.) On May 22, 2016, the Post published an article titled “‘The Biggest Loser’ drugged us so we’d lose weight.” (Id. 26, Ex. A (the “May 22 Article”).) On May 23, 2016, the Post published two additional articles titled “‘Biggest Loser’ contestants demand NBC cancel show,” (id. 28, Ex. B (the “First May 23 Article”)), and “‘Biggest Loser’ rigged weigh-ins by forcing contestants to eat baking soda,’” (id. 28, Ex. C (the “Second May 23 Article”)) (collectively, the “Articles”). Plaintiff identifies at least nine statements across the three Articles that he alleges are false and defamatory. (Id. 29.) With respect to Gwynn, Plaintiff’s SAC identifies the following allegedly false statements:e. Gwynn claims that she took an illicit yellow and black pill supposedly given to her by a Show staff member, stating “‘I felt jittery and hyper’…'I went and told the sports medicine guy. The next day, Dr. H gave us some lame explanation of why they got added to our regimen and that it was up to us to take them…People chastise Bill Cosby for allegedly offering meds to women, but it’s acceptable to do [sic] to fat people to make them lose weight. I feel like we got raped, too.’”g. “Joelle Gwynn, of Season 7, said of [sic] the show’s doctor, Rob Huizenga, told them it was ‘up to us to take [the illicit drugs].’”(Id.
29(e), 29(g), the “Gwynn Statements” or “Statements.”) Plaintiff alleges that several individuals closely connected to the Show, including Plaintiff, informed the Post that contestants were not given illegal drugs. (Id. 33.) Quoting the May 22 Article, Plaintiff avers that he told the Post that “[n]othing could be further from the truth. Contestants are told at the start of the show that there is zero tolerance for any weight-loss drugs. Urine drug screens and the evaluation of serial weights are repeatedly used to flush out possible illicit use.” (Id.) Plaintiff also alleges that the Show’s producers informed the Post that they “prohibit the use of any illegal substances,” and that a trainer for the Show told the Post that allegations regarding illegal drug use were “absolutely false.” (Id.) Plaintiff alleges that “Defendants knew [their] statements to be false” at the time the Articles were published, and that the statements were made “with the intention and knowledge that they were false and were likely to harm [Plaintiff's] personal and professional reputation, and/or with reckless disregard for the truth of the statements.” (Id.
