This action never should have been filed. The First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), like the initial complaint filed before it, sacrifices legal sufficiency for loud publicity. Though Crytek GmbH (“Crytek”) twice now conceals the actual Game License Agreement (“GLA”) from the Court and the press, the Court possesses the power to examine the incorporated GLA on this motion. The GLA eliminates virtually every claim and remedy Crytek seeks; Crytek’s admission that Defendants are not even using Crytek’s software gets rid of the rest. The allegations regarding Defendants’ co-founder Ortwin Freyermuth and another employee Carl Jones (the “Offending Allegations”), though modified in retreat by Crytek’s counsel after being confronted with a Rule 11 motion based on a false allegation contained in the initial complaint, still bear absolutely no material relation to any claim or named party, and have everything to do with generating misleading, scandalous press. Neither of Crytek’s two contrived claims can survive the contract, and all its remedies are contractually barred, justifying dismissal as a matter of law. The Court also should send a message to Crytek by striking the immaterial, impertinent and scandalous Offending Allegations in paragraph 15 of the FAC.