Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-07465/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-07465-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1346 Tort Claim

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

TRICIA TAMKIN, 

Plaintiff,

vs. 

ZOHO CORPORATION, 

Defendant. 

CASE NO. 19-cv-07465-YGR 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND;

DISMISSING STATE COMMON LAW 

COPYRIGHT CLAIM

Re: Dkt. No. 7 

On November 21, 2019, plaintiff Tricia Tamkin filed a motion to remand this case back to 

the California Superior Court, County of Alameda. (Dkt. No. 7.) Defendant Zoho Corporation 

filed an opposition thereto, after which plaintiff filed a reply brief. (Dkt. Nos. 17, 21.) 

In addition, on November 25, 2019, defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint 

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Dkt. No. 9.) Plaintiff filed an opposition 

thereto, after which defendant filed a reply brief. (Dkt. Nos. 18, 23.) 

Having carefully considered the briefing and arguments submitted in this matter, and for 

the reasons set forth on the record on January 7, 2020, the Court orders as follows: 

(1) Plaintiff’s common law copyright cause of action is preempted by the Copyright Act, 

17 U.S.C. section 301(a). Downing v. Abercrombie & Fitch, 265 F.3d 994, 1003 (9th 

Cir. 2001); Kodadek v. MTV Networks, Inc., 152 F.3d 1209, 1212–13 (9th Cir. 1998). 

Thus, this state law claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

1

(2) The Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff’s remaining 

claims. Acri v. Varian Associates 114 F.3d 999, 1000 (9th Cir. 1997). The Court 

 1

 Insofar as the preempted claim may be recharacterized as a federal claim, Hansen v. Grp. 

Health Coop., 902 F.3d 1051, 1058 (9th Cir. 2018), plaintiff has conceded that she cannot 

maintain such a claim at this juncture given her failure to register the copyright at issue. Reed 

Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick, 559 U.S. 154, 157, 130 S.Ct. 1237, 176 L.Ed.2d 18 (2010). 

Case 4:19-cv-07465-YGR Document 25 Filed 01/09/20 Page 1 of 2
2 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

therefore lacks subject matter jurisdiction to hear this case. Accordingly, the Court 

GRANTS plaintiff’s motion to remand this action to the California Superior Court, 

County of Alameda. The Clerk of Court is directed to remand the case and close the 

file. 

This Order terminates Docket Number 7. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 9, 2020 

 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 4:19-cv-07465-YGR Document 25 Filed 01/09/20 Page 2 of 2