The TCPA and related processes in other states/federally aren't supposed to let off people who have done actual defamation, particularly where damages are involved. By accepting the TCPA motion, Judge Chupp was basically saying there's no prima facie case that Mignogna had suffered any damages from the defendants' actions. Beard and his firm's motion for appeal is trying to show that there were in fact damages in the form of him being dropped from cons and replaced as a voice actor for his characters, and thus it was improper to throw the case out before it started. They just need to prove it at a prima facie, or superficial, level; evidence that proves it can be shown at the full trial.
The TCPA and related are supposed to protect people who have not defamed people and/or haven't done any damage to them. So if I call you a rapist, I'm probably defaming you, but unless you can prove that I've actually done some sort of damage to you with these words I could probably get away with it. Thus, busy courts are theoretically spared from having to bother with that case. Of course, different states have different specifics.
.
