Thread by @AriCohn

1/ Twitter filed its motion to dismiss in the suit brought by the owner of the repair shop that had Hunter Biden's laptop, who claims Twitter's explanation for blocking the article defamed him. Twitter says he failed to plead...well...everything.

Filing: courtlistener.com/docket/5930032…

2/ Love that they led off with a cite to Bongino's failure.

3/ Twitter correctly points out that the plaintiff's interpretation of the allegedly defamatory statements aren't the relevant locus of analysis. It's the actual words used.

4/ Twitter next argues that the statements are not "of and concerning" the plaintiff because he's literally never mentioned in either Twitter's statements OR the article that Twitter's statements were about:

5/ Twitter goes on to destroy the plaintiff's per se claim, arguing that they never said he engaged in criminal conduct.

6/ And then there is the weird argument that Twitter's reasons for why they generally block such content can be imputed to him in a defamatory way.

7/ Up next, failure to plead special damages

8/ After saying that plaintiff also failed to plead publication (lol), Twitter raises the oft-fatal issue of failure to actually plead facts sufficient to infer actual malice. Conclusory allegations do not cut it in federal court.

9/ Bonus: because Florida's anti-SLAPP law has no procedural aspect to it, Twitter gets to go for fees and costs even in federal court.

10/ There are enough grounds for dismissal here that it seems highly unlikely this suit survives (not that anyone really ever thought that was likely in the first place).