Case 0:17-cv-60426-UU Document 169 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/04/2018 Page 4 of 22 hacked the Democratic Party had merit. Id. ¶ 28, D.E. 38 ¶ 28. Plaintiffs assert that because Defendants could not verify the Dossier and knew that it contained “some clear errors,” Defendants published it without reasonable care for, or with reckless disregard as to the truth. Id. ¶ 43. And, despite the redaction of Plaintiffs’ identities, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants’ decision to publish the Dossier defamed them. Id. ¶ 51. According to Plaintiffs, this defamation has caused them to lose business and credit, and has otherwise damaged their reputations. Id. ¶¶ 5, 47–48. Defendants assert, among other defenses, that their publication of the Dossier is protected by the fair report privilege and the neutral report privilege. D.E. 38, p. 9. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiffs filed the complaint on February 28, 2017. D.E. 1. Defendants filed the operative amended answer on June 29, 2017. D.E. 38. Discovery is underway and is proceeding slowly. The Court has held several status conferences to monitor the pace of discovery and to address various issues as they arise. During one such conference on September 29, 2017, the Court encouraged the parties to move for partial judgement on the pleadings with respect to Defendants’ asserted privileges. D.E. 78, p. 21:13–17. On January 18, 2018, Plaintiffs obliged the Court and filed the present motion. D.E. 115. LEGAL STANDARD Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), “after the pleadings are closed—but early enough not to delay trial—a party may move for judgment on the pleadings.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c). A judgment on the pleadings is a decision on the merits, appropriate where “there are no material facts in dispute and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Scott v. Taylor, 405 F.3d 1251, 1253 (11th Cir. 2005) (citing Cannon v. City of W. Palm Beach, 250 4