Reintegrative Therapy Association, Inc. v. David Kinitz

── Reintegrative Therapy Association, Inc. v. David Kinitz ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Date: June 03, 2026 Category: General FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 3 2026 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT REINTEGRATIVE THERAPY No. 22-56009 ASSOCIATION, INC., a California Corporation; JOSEPH NICOLOSI JR., an D.C. No. 3:21-cv-01297-BEN-BLM individual, Plaintiffs-Appellees, MEMORANDUM* v. DAVID J. KINITZ, an individual; TRAVIS SALWAY, an individual, Defendants-Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted November 6, 2023 Pasadena, California Submission Withdrawn January 22, 2024 Resubmitted June 03, 2026 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Before: W. FLETCHER and MENDOZA, Circuit Judges, and SCHREIER,** District Judge. Appellants David J. Kinitz and Dr. Travis Salway challenge the district court’s order denying as moot their special motions to strike and their requests for attorneys’ fees and costs under California’s anti-SLAPP statute.1 This case was originally argued on November 6, 2023. On January 22, 2024, we held this case in abeyance pending a final en banc decision in Martinez v. ZoomInfo Technologies, Inc., No. 22-35305. After Martinez settled, we continued to hold this case in abeyance pending a final en banc decision in Gopher Media, LLC v. Melone, No. 24-2626. The en banc panel decided Gopher Media on October 9, 2025, after which we ordered supplemental briefing to address the effect of that opinion. With briefing completed, we may now decide the appeal before us. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review “a district court’s denial of a motion to strike under California’s anti-SLAPP statute” de novo. Mindys Cosmetics, Inc. v. Dakar, 611 F.3d 590, 595 (9th Cir. 2010). We reverse ** The Honorable Karen E. Schreier, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota, sitting by designation. 1 “SLAPP” is an acronym for “strategic lawsuit against public participation.” 2 the district court’s order and remand for a decision on the merits of Appellants’ special motions to strike. Appellee Dr. Joseph Nicolosi Jr. is the founder and president of Reintegrative Therapy Association, Inc. (“RTA”). RTA is a non-profit corporation that trains therapists to employ its trademarked brand of therapy, called Reintegrative Therapy. In 2021, Appellants published an academic article that listed “reintegrative therapy” as a possible synonym for conversion therapy. Dr. Nicolosi and RTA brought a defamation suit against Appellants, arguing that the article could be read to reference their brand of therapy, which they assert is not a form of conversion therapy. Appellants filed motions to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction, along with special motions to strike and requests for attorneys’ fees and costs under California’s anti-SLAPP statute. See Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(b), (c)(1). The district court granted Appellants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, denied Appellants’ anti-SLAPP motions as moot, and granted Appellees leave to amend their complaint. Before the deadline to file an amended complaint, Appellees filed a successful motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice. Appellants filed a