Jake Mandeville-Anthony v. The Walt Disney Company et al
Filing
44
ORDER by Judge Valerie Baker Fairbank GRANTING Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 29 , pursuant to FRCP 12(c), judgment on the pleadings is entered infavor of Defendants, and Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety withprejudice. Judgment shall be entered in favor of Defendants against Plaintiff. (jp)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
WESTERN DIVISION
12
13
14
JAKE MANDEVILLE-ANTHONY,
an individual,
15
Plaintiff,
16
17
18
19
v.
THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY,
WALT DISNEY PICTURES,
DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC.,
PIXAR d/b/a PIXAR ANIMATION
STUDIOS; and DOES 1-10, inclusive,
20
Defendants.
21
22
23
24
25
26
///
27
///
28
///
\\\LA - 022031/000020 - 486896 v1
Case No. CV 11-2137 VBF (JEMx)
Complaint Filed: March 14, 2011
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR
JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT
WITH PREJUDICE
Hon. Valerie Baker Fairbank
1
Defendants The Walt Disney Company’s, Walt Disney Pictures’, Disney
2
Enterprises, Inc.’s and Pixar’s (“Defendants”) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
3
came before the Court on July 25, 2011. After considering the parties’ briefs and the
4
their respective works (incorporated by reference in the Complaint), the Court
5
ORDERS as follows:
6
(1)
Plaintiff’s works, Cookie & Co. and Cars/Auto-Excess/Cars Chaos and
7
Defendants’ works, CARS, CARS 2, and CARS Toon: Mater’s Tall Tales, are not
8
substantially similarity as a matter of law. Zella v. E.W. Scripps Co., 529 F. Supp.
9
2d 1124, 1130 (2007); Funky Films v. Time Warner Ent. Co., 462 F.3d 1072, 1077
10
(9th Cir. 2006). Among other things, the protectable elements of the parties’
11
respective works are dissimilar in plot, sequence of events, pace, themes, dialogue,
12
mood, setting, and characters. Id. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s First Cause of Action for
13
copyright infringement is DISMISSED with prejudice.
14
(2)
Plaintiff’s Second Cause of Action for Breach of Implied Contract is
15
DISMISSED with prejudice because it is barred by the applicable two-year statute
16
of limitations. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 339(1); Thompson v. California Brewing
17
Company, 191 Cal. App. 2d 506, 507 (1961).
18
Accordingly, pursuant to FRCP 12(c), judgment on the pleadings is entered in
19
favor of Defendants, and Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety with
20
prejudice. Judgment shall be entered in favor of Defendants against Plaintiff.
21
22
IT IS SO ORDERED.
23
24
Dated:
7-27-11
Hon. Valerie Baker Fairbank
United States District Court Judge
25
26
27
28
\\\LA - 022031/000020 - 486896 v1
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
