The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 were read on this motion to/for DISMISSAL. DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION In March 2022, plaintiff Amuze commenced this action against defendants Better Business Bureau and its affiliate the Better Business Bureau of Greater Maryland asserting causes of action for defamation, libel, and intentional infliction of emotional distress over four comments that consumers of Amuze posted to BBB-GM’s online platform. In this motion sequence (001), defendants move to dismiss the complaint in its entirety pursuant to CPLR 3211 (g) (1) and (a) (7). Plaintiff opposes the motion; however, should the Court be inclined to grant the motion, it cross-moves for leave to amend the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3025. For the following reasons, defendants’ motion is granted, and plaintiff’s cross-motion to amend the complaint is denied. BACKGROUND The Better Business Bureau of Greater Maryland (hereinafter, “BBB-GM”) is a non-profit organization that publishes online profiles of business located or headquartered within the geographic region of Maryland. The profiles provide a platform for consumers of these business to comment or complain publicly about their interaction with the businesses themselves. From 2019 through 2022, BBB-GM maintained an online profile for Amuze,1 an online clothing retailer. (NYSCEF doc. no. 2 at 6, amended complaint.) Amuze alleges that at least four statements listed on Amuze’s BBB-GM profile defame it. These include the statements: (1) “This [sic] people are fraud.”; (2) “They promised me a full refund on March 31st. I have all the messages to prove everything. It is now 11:36 pm on April 12th and I still have not gotten a refund.”; (3) “This company is guilty of unethical business practices.”; and (4) “They will charge a huge return shipping fee and offer credit for more defective or counterfeit merchandise.” (Id. at 10.) Plaintiff asserts that, at the time of publication, BBB-GM knew or should have known that these statements were false, inaccurate, and/or erroneous. (Id. at 11, 20.) The original complaint does not allege any further operative facts. However, as plaintiff has moved pursuant to CPLR 3025, the Court below includes the allegations from plaintiff’s proposed amended According to plaintiff’s proposed amended complaint, BBB-GM reached out in May of 2019 to “meet Plaintiff and learn more about Plaintiff’s business, and fact-find.” (NYSCEF doc. no. 14 at 8.) Plaintiff then “cooperated” with BBB-GM’s request for information, “with the understanding that Defendant would ensure inaccurate, false or otherwise erroneous information” would be removed from its online profile. (Id. at 9.) On November 4, 2021, BBB-GM advised plaintiff that it had posted an “F” rating on its Amuze profile, because, in plaintiff’s words, “Plaintiff refused to engage in Defendant’s arbitrary dispute resolution process.” (Id. at 17.) The proposed complaint further states that the BBB and BBB-GM letter grade “presents BBB’s opinion” of the business’s “marketplace behavior” and takes into account the business’s responsiveness to customers complaints filed with them, its transparency, and the truthfulness of their advertising practices. (Id. at 13.) As to damages, plaintiff alleges that, as a result of BBB-GM’s international reputation and authority in the industry, plaintiff’s reputation has been harmed. (Id. at
