ORDER AND OPINION DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS This action by ten plaintiffs — Zoe Brock, Caitlin Dulany, Louisette Geiss, Larissa Gomes, Katherine Kendall, Nannette Klatt, Melissa Sagemiller, Sarah Ann Thomas, Melissa Thompson, and Jane Doe — individually and on behalf of a class, against Harvey Weinstein (“H. Weinstein”), his former companies, and certain officers and directors of those companies, charges that H. Weinstein sexually harassed and assaulted them between 1993 and 2011, and that the other defendants knew of, facilitated, and covered up his misconduct. Defendants move to dismiss.The First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) contains eighteen counts, including four federal claims for violations of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (“TVPA”) (Counts I and II) and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) (Counts v. and VI), and fourteen state claims for negligent supervision and retention (Counts III and IV), battery (Counts VII and VIII), assault (Counts IX and X), false imprisonment (Counts XI and XII), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Counts XIII and XIV), negligent infliction of emotional distress (Counts XV and XVI), and ratification (Counts XVII and XVIII). The state law claims fall into two categories: (i) allegations against Miramax Film NY LLC (“Miramax”); The Walt Disney Company, Disney Enterprises, Inc., Buena Vista International, Inc. (together, “Disney”); and certain officers of these companies (together with Miramax and Disney, the “Miramax Defendants”) for conduct occurring before September 30, 2005; and (ii) allegations against The Weinstein Company Holdings, LLC (“TWC”) and certain officers and directors of TWC (together with TWC, the “TWC Defendants”) for conduct occurring after September 30, 2005.Defendants move to dismiss under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (ECF Nos. 199, 239, 241, 246, and 254). For the reasons discussed below, H. Weinstein’s motion to dismiss the TVPA claim against him (Count I) is denied. All other claims (Counts II-XVIII) are dismissed against all defendants, including H. Weinstein: the TVPA participation claims (Count II) fail to allege receipt of a benefit from participation in sex trafficking, the RICO claims (Counts v. and VI) fail to allege injury to business or property caused by a RICO violation, and the state law claims (Counts III, IV, VII-XVIII) are untimely under the applicable statutes of limitations.BACKGROUNDI. Factual Backgrounda. Harvey Weinstein’s Film EmpireH. Weinstein and his brother, Robert Weinstein (“R. Weinstein”), co-founded Miramax in the late 1970s. FAC 60. Miramax grew from a small film-distribution company to become, by 1989, “the most successful independent [film] studio in America.” Id. at 60. In 1993, the Weinstein brothers sold Miramax to Disney for $80 million and retained their leadership of Miramax following the acquisition. Id. at 61. Miramax released its first blockbuster film, Pulp Fiction, in 1994. Id. at 61. Many of the company’s subsequent films achieved great commercial and critical success. Id. at 62.On September 30, 2005, the Weinstein brothers left Miramax and Disney. Id. at 63. Their new company, TWC, had its own run of major film and television successes. See FAC, Ex. A. In the wake of the revelations concerning H. Weinstein’s alleged misconduct, TWC filed for bankruptcy. FAC 758.H. Weinstein’s success put him among the most powerful and influential executives in the entertainment industry. Id. at 10. That power and influence included the “ability to make or break…careers,” which he allegedly used to abuse and silence numerous young women who sought his help in advancing their careers. Id. at 65.b. Public Revelation of Accusations Against Harvey WeinsteinOn October 5, 2017, The New York Times published an article revealing multiple allegations of sexual harassment against H. Weinstein. Id. at 11. In the wake of the article’s publication, four TWC board members resigned and the board voted to terminate H. Weinstein’s services. Id. at
433-437. Subsequent reporting, most notably in The New York Times and The New Yorker, described a pattern of sexual assaults and cover-ups by H. Weinstein, assisted or condoned by members of his inner circle.c. Plaintiffs’ AllegationsPlaintiffs allege that H. Weinstein’s “predatory and sexually harassing behavior toward women,” id. at 84, followed a consistent pattern: H. Weinstein set up meetings with women under the guise of assisting them with their careers, isolated them after they had arrived for the meetings, and assaulted, battered, or attempted to assault them. Id. at
