Jiang v. NBCUIVERSAL Media, LLC

Background

Baiting Jiang sued KNTV Television LLC, which operated under the NBC Bay Area name, over three news stories published on its website and social-media platforms. The stories concerned Jiang’s dispute with a former landlord, related eviction and civil-harassment proceedings in San Mateo County Superior Court, and the broader effects of California’s COVID-19 eviction moratorium. Jiang asserted one defamation claim and alleged that the reports falsely stated, among other things, that she had harmed or threatened members of the former landlord’s family, intentionally damaged the home, and sought to live there without paying rent.

KNTV moved to strike the complaint under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, which provides an early procedure for challenging claims based on protected speech or petitioning activity. KNTV also moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and requested attorney’s fees and costs. Jiang filed several oppositions and moved to stay the proceedings pending criminal charges in San Mateo Superior Court. The parties consented to proceedings before a magistrate judge.

Anti-SLAPP ruling

The court applied California’s anti-SLAPP statute because it applies to state-law claims in federal court. The statute uses a two-step test: first, the defendant must show that the claim arises from protected speech or petitioning activity concerning a public issue; second, the plaintiff must show a probability of prevailing.

The court concluded that KNTV’s reports satisfied the first step. The reports concerned eviction and civil-harassment proceedings under review by a judicial body, landlord-tenant disputes that the court considered matters of public interest, and statements published through KNTV’s website and social-media accounts, which the court treated as public forums.

The court then held that Jiang had not shown a probability of prevailing because the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship. Federal diversity jurisdiction requires, among other things, that the parties be citizens of different states and that the amount in controversy exceed $75,000. The court found that both parties were California residents. It therefore struck Jiang’s defamation claim under the anti-SLAPP statute.

Attorney’s fees

The court held that California’s anti-SLAPP fee provision applies in federal court and that a defendant who prevails on a special motion to strike is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs under the statute. KNTV requested $17,673.95 in attorney’s fees, including $13,063.36 for work already performed and an estimated $4,610.59 for additional work.

Using the lodestar method—reasonable hours multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate—the court found that the hourly rates and 34.70 hours billed were reasonable. It awarded KNTV $13,063.36 for work already performed and deferred consideration of additional fees until KNTV submitted documentation of the additional hours billed.

Disposition

The court struck Jiang’s defamation claim under the anti-SLAPP statute, granted KNTV’s motion for $13,063.36 in attorney’s fees, instructed KNTV’s counsel to submit documentation of any additional hours billed, and denied Jiang’s motion to stay.