## Facts

- Tannerite Sports, LLC manufactured exploding rifle targets made of two separately packaged components (ammonium nitrate and aluminum powder) that detonate when mixed and shot with a high-velocity bullet.
- NBCUniversal News Group aired a Today Show segment and published a related online article warning about exploding rifle targets and their potential misuse.
- The broadcast used dramatic language, including that the reporter was “basically holding a bomb” and that a “key ingredient” had been used by terrorists, while showing the product and an explosion demonstration.
- The reporting discussed ease of purchase, safety risks, and potential criminal misuse, and included commentary from experts and public officials urging regulation.
- Tannerite’s own product materials warned that targets should be used away from populated areas and that improper use could start fires, be less safe to handle, and cause erratic performance.
- Tannerite alleged the segment and article defamed it by conveying that its products were “bombs” as sold and were dangerous “on the shelf” before consumers opened and mixed the components.

## Issues

1. Whether federal pleading standards require a defamation plaintiff applying New York law to plead facts that plausibly show the challenged statements were false (not substantially true).
2. Whether Tannerite plausibly alleged falsity as to NBC’s characterization of the targets as “bombs” and the claimed implication that unopened targets were dangerous in retail stores.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6).
- The court held that, in federal court, a New York defamation plaintiff must plausibly plead falsity with supporting facts.
- The court held Tannerite failed to plead falsity because NBC’s statements were substantially true in context.
- The court concluded the broadcast did not reasonably convey the alleged implication that unopened targets were dangerous on store shelves; it focused on purchase and subsequent mixing and use.
- The court affirmed denial of leave to amend because the proposed amendments did not cure the failure to plead falsity.

## Legal Principles

- In federal court, Twombly/Iqbal plausibility applies to defamation claims; the plaintiff must plead facts showing the challenged statement is false.
- Under New York defamation law, substantial truth is a complete defense; liability turns on the “gist” or “sting,” not literal precision.
- Allegedly defamatory implications are evaluated by reading or viewing the publication as a whole; an implication is actionable only if the publication reasonably conveys it.
- Figurative or colloquial descriptions may be non-actionable when, in context, they do not materially misstate the underlying facts.

## Conclusion

The court upheld dismissal because Tannerite did not plausibly allege falsity: the reporting’s central thrust about an easily obtained product that can be turned into an explosive device was substantially true, and the segment did not reasonably imply that the unopened product was inherently dangerous on retail shelves.


Tannerite Sports, LLC v. NBCUniversal News Grp., 864 F.3d 236 (2d Cir. 2017)