Now that the deadline for allowable amendments to his complaint in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness has passed, I’m gong to spend some time taunting The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin for his incompetence in drafting his original Complaint, First Amended Complaint, and Second Amended Complaint.Consider the allegation above. It accuses me of using this blog and my Twitter account to defame TDPK “hundreds” of times since mid October. That’s a good opening sentence for a set of allegations relating to defamation, but it isn’t everything necessary to allege the tort. In order for such an allegation to stand up to a motion to dismiss, it must say with specificity what was said or written that was defamatory and when it was published. Here’s what the Supreme Court has said:
Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Every one of the motions to dismiss filed against TDPK’s First Amended Complaint cited Iqbal and/or another recent Supreme Court case. Yet, Kimberlin did not bother to correct his deficient pleadings by alleging specific instances of actions by the defendants that led to damages that he suffered. In my case that would be because there were no such incidents.
Indeed, the only specific writing of mine that TDPK referenced in any of his complaints is a blog post that does not say what he claims it says. Furthermore, even if it were defamatory (and it isn’t), it is so old as to be beyond the statute of limitations on defamation.
If I had published hundreds of defamatory comments about TDPK over the past five months, surely he could have come up with at least one or two examples and cite them. The fact that he did not suggests that he is either massively incompetent or he is lying. Or both.