Case 0:17-cv-60426-UU Document 169 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/04/2018 Page 15 of 22 As an initial matter, it is of no moment that the Article and Dossier are not, strictly speaking, reports about an official proceeding such as a report of a judicial proceeding or summary of a law enforcement investigation. The privilege applies if the Dossier was part of or subject to an official proceeding. See, e.g., Fine, 11 F. Supp. 3d 209 (applying privilege to audio recording by a private citizen later used in a law-enforcement investigation); Komarov 180 Misc. 2d at 660 (holding that the privilege applies to “affidavits submitted in the proceeding.”); Branca v. Mayesh, 101 A.D.2d 872, 873 aff’d, 63 N.Y.2d 994 (N.Y. App. 1984) (holding that the privilege applies to “any pleading made within the course of the proceeding.”) (citing Campbell v. New York Evening Post, 245 N.Y. 320, 320 (N.Y. 1927)). Plaintiffs take a narrow view of “official proceeding,” arguing that that term encompasses only an “actual investigation.” D.E. 115, p. 11. And because the Article does not state in its text that the Dossier was the subject of an investigation, the privilege does not apply. Id. Defendants respond that “official proceeding” is broadly defined, citing several cases holding that the term encompasses any “‘actions taken by a person officially empowered to do so.’” D.E. 133, p. 13 (quoting Abakporo, 2011 WL 4460547, at *10 (quoting Freeze Right, 101 A.D.2d at 182)). Defendants argue that this broad standard is satisfied for several reasons. First, the Article states that the Dossier circulated at the highest levels of the government, that the President and President-elect were briefed about the allegations therein, and that two senators received it and sent it to the FBI. And second, the Article links to a CNN article that stated that four U.S. intelligence directors gave confidential briefings about the allegations to the President and President-elect, and, most importantly, that the FBI was investigating the truth of the allegations. The Court agrees with Defendants that the term “official proceeding” should be broadly interpreted to apply to any official action. See, e.g., Freeze Right, 101 A.D.2d at 182. A 15