pearance may still possess information that lends a perception by the public that their remarks on a pending case hold greater authority. See In re Hinds, 449 A.2d 483, 496 (N.J. 1982); see also People v. Buttajuoco, 599 N.Y.S.2d 419 (Nassau Cty. Ct. 1993). Such is the case with Mr. Markus's role in

That argument was rejected above as well. See supra § III.C.4.a. (citing Express Oil Change, 933 F. Supp. 2d at 1351- 52; DGB, 55 So. 3d at 233-34; Hinds, 55 So. 3d at 231-34). Therefore, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that BIC's motion to dismiss be denied with respect to Counts VIII-XI. IV. Conclusion