With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". postings and e-mails complaining about the care her mentally handicapped son was receiving were not made pursuant to an official proceeding, nor could they be construed as a request for an official investigation or proceeding, and were therefore not entitled to anti-SLAPP protection). 18 OCGA § 9-11-11.1 (b); see also generally Adventure Outdoors, Inc. v. Bloomberg, 307 Ga. App. 356, 360 (2) (705 SE2d 241) (2010) (extending OCGA § 9-11-11.1 protection to speech designed to inform the public about gun dealers alleged to be violating federal laws). 19 See OCGA § 9-11-11.1 (a). Cf. Citizens for Ethics in Gov’t, LLC v. Atlanta Dev. Auth., 303 Ga. App. 724 (694 SE2d 680) (2010) (illustrating a clear abuse of the judicial process). 20 See generally Atlanta Humane Soc’y, 278 Ga. at 454 (1) (<HOLDING>); see also Lovett, 300 Ga. App. at 801;

A: holding that ocga  911111 offers substantive protection beyond the procedural consideration related to the timing of the filing of the verification
B: holding that standard of review is a matter of procedural rather than substantive law
C: holding that courts apply the procedural law of the forum and the substantive law of the jurisdiction originating the claim
D: recognizing that ocga  911111 embodies both a procedural and substantive component
A.