its entirety. Accordingly it should be summarily denied as

10 id. 12 13 14 L5 16 ne) 18 life) 20 21 22 23 24 25 95 H3vlgiu2 its entirety. Accordingly it should be summarily denied as moot. This motion should also be denied because it advances the exact same arguments defendant advanced in her summary judgment motion. She is seeking rehearing on her summary judgment motion, dressed up as a motion in limine. Many courts in this district have summarily denied motions in limine that seek to relitigate arguments from summary judgment, and I have listed six such cases on pages 7 and 8 of our response in opposition. You ordered nine defendant's motions for summary judgment. This Court rejects the argument that she should have partial summary judgment on the January 4th statement. The Ww last sentence of that order states, "Because of the existence of triable issues of material fact rather than opinion and because the prelitigation privilege is inapplicable, the motion for summary judgment is denied." Defendant's reiteration of her defamatory press release confirming it two days later is something that this Court did not rule that that is not actionable. So she's seeking rehearing. Also importantly, your Honor, Ms. Giuffre opposed summary judgment on defendant's defamation in its entirety. She opposed the motion for summary judgment in its entirety, and this statement, as part and parcel of defendant's defamation and part and parcel of defendant's motion for summary judgment. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011398