Source: https://www.scribd.com/doc/65510308/Complaint-Harlan-Ellison-in-Time
Timestamp: 2017-06-28 19:46:57
Document Index: 174818400

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1331', '§ 1338', '§ 1400', '§ 1391', '§ 1391', '§ 102', '§ 101', '§ 106', '§ 502', '§ 503', '§ 504', '§ 2201', '§ 106', '§ 502', '§ 502', '§ 504', '§ 505']

Complaint Harlan Ellison in Time | Copyright Law Of The United States | Complaint
Complaint Harlan Ellison in TimeUploaded by mschwimmerRelated InterestsCopyright Law Of The United StatesComplaintDerivative WorkCopyrightDamagesRating and Stats0.0 (0)Document ActionsDownloadShare or Embed DocumentEmbedDescription: complaint harlan ellison in timeView Morecomplaint harlan ellison in timeCopyright: Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)Download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate content23 DRINKER BIDDLE & REATl-I LLP Cl11;'istopher F. Wong (SBN 142507) chns. worm@dbr.com Adam J. Thurston (SBN 162636) adam. com "" ...,; c, r')--
r't .-1 .=.!::" .... ; .. CZl r-
: F"l"J .. , " , " ..,',." Ryan R. Salsig,1SBN 250830) 4 · ryan.salsig@dbr.com 1800 Century Park East, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, California 90067-1517 Telephone: (310) 203-4000 Facslmile: (310) 229-1285 :. -" ' ; .... .. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .:; ... t :' Tl '-I -, -0 r ,..,.:..: . :s: :::; ry • ., t'1 rt.; N W Attorneys for Plaintiff The Kil1manjaro Corporation -1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 THE KILIMANJARO CORPORA 110N. a California 14 Corporation. 07 5 i f;3C<) C01v1PLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND DECLARATORY RELIEF 15 Plai ntiff, 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 v. NEW REGENCY PRODUCTIONS, INC., a California corporationi ANDREW NICCOL, an indiVIdual; and DOES 1 through 10. inclusive, Defendants. JURy TRIAL DEMAND Plaintiff The Kilimaltjaro Corporation ("TKC' or "Plaintiff') hereby alleges the following claims for relief against defend'ants New Regency Productions, Inc. ("Regency"), Andrew Niccol and Does 1 through \ 0, inclusive (collectively, JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over this Ilction and the claims asserted herein, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 ("federal question DRINK6R &: l.AOIII04:i'905.1 LLl' A.TTIJKI'IIII'I'P. ",T tAW \'v:; At'U::hll COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT lNFRINOEMENT AND.TURV TRIAL DEMAND Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 1 of 16 Page ID #:5
jurisdiction") and § 1338(a) (actions arising under any Act of Congress relating to 2 copyright), in that this action arises under the laws of the United States and, more 3 specifically, Acts of Congress relating to copyrights. 4 2. Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction of the Court because 5 they reside, have agents, do or transact business, or are othelwise found, and have 6 purposefully availed themselves of the privilege of doing business, in California 7 and this District. 8 3. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1400(a) 9 because Defendants have a regular and established place of business in this District 10 and may be found in this District. Venue is also proper in this District pursuant to 11 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving 12 rise to the claims occurred in this District and a substantial part of the property that 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 is the subject of this action is situated in this District. Alternatively, venue is also proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(3) because Defendants have a regular and established place of business in this District and may be found in this District. THE PARTIES 4. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff TKC was a California corporation with its principal place of business in Sherman Oaks, California, duly authorized to do and doing business in this District. At all times material hereto, TKC has been engaged in the business of, among other things, holding, distributing, copying, licensing and otherwise exploiting the copyrighted works of Harlan Ellison, including without limitation, for adaptation into television programs, feature films and other formats. Harlan Ellison is the President of TKC. 5. TKC is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendant Niccol is an individual residing and doing business in this District. TKC is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendant Niccol wrote the screenplay for a feature length motion picture entitled I'm.Mortal, and sold, DRINKER BIDDLE & LAOII 1045905. 1 - 2 -
REATH LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW Los ANGELES COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 2 of 16 Page ID #:6
1 licensed, or otherwise authorized defendant Regency to use it to make the motion 2 picture entitled In Time, as more fully alleged below. 3 6. TKC is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendant 4 Regency is a California corporation with its principal place of business in Los 5 Angeles, California, doing business in this District. At all times material hereto, 6 Regency has been engaged in the business of, among other things, developing, 7 producing and distributing feature films. 8 7. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, partner, 9 associate, agent, employee, or otherwise, of the defendants named in this complaint 10 as Does 1 through 10, inclusive, are unknown to TKC, which therefore sues such 11 defendants by such fictitious names. TKC will amend this complaint to show the 12 true names and capacities of the Doe defendants when it has ascertained the same. 13 TKC is informed and believes and on that basis alleges that, at all relevant times, 14 Does 1 through 10, inclusive, are responsible in some manner for the conduct 15 herein alleged and proximately caused TKC's damages. TKC is informed and 16 believes and on that basis alleges that, at all relevant times, Does 1 through 10, 17 inclusive, and each of them, were the agents of, and/or were acting in concert with, 18 each of the remaining defendants and, in doing the things alleged, were acting 19 within the scope of such agency. Any reference to any of the named defendants 20 herein shall also constitute a reference to the Doe defendants. 21 FACTUAL BACKGROUND 22 8. Harlan Ellison is one of the most celebrated science fiction writers of 23 our time, and has won more awards for his science fiction writing than any other 24 living author, including the Hugo award (eight and a halftimes), Nebula (four 25 times), Bram Stoker (six times), Edgar (two times), the Writers Guild of America 26 A ward (four times), and many others. 27 9. Harlan Ellison is the author of "Repent, Harlequin!" Said the 28 Ticktockman (hereafter, "Repent, Harlequin!"), one of the most famous and widely DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP LA01 / 1045905.l - 3 -
ATTORNEYS AT LAW COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND Los ANGEl. E5 Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 3 of 16 Page ID #:7
1 published science fiction short stories ever written. Repent, Harlequin! won the 2 1966 Hugo Award for best short story, as well as the 1965 Nebula Award. It has 3 been translated into rmmerous foreign languages and published throughout the 4 world. It is also among the most reprinted short stories in the English language. 5 Repent, Harlequin! was first published in 1965 and is registered with the United 6 States Copyright Office under registration number B217120, which was duly 7 renewed in December 1993 under renewal number RE648724. 8 10. By a fully executed written agreement dated July 19,2001, and 9 recorded with the United States Copyright Office, Harlan Ellison transferred all 10 right, title and interest in Repent, Harlequin! to TKC. As a result of this transfer, 11 TKC owns the copyrights in and to Repent, Harlequin!. 12 11. Over the years, Mr. Ellison has been approached on numerous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 occasions with requests for permission to adapt Repent, Harlequin! into a feature film but, until recently, Mr. Ellison has declined. In or around November 2010, TKC entered into an agreement with a third party to create a screenplay based upon Repent, Harlequin!, suitable for sale or license to a studio for the creation of a feature length motion picture. The screenplay has been written and is ready to present to studios. 12. However, the value and marketability of the screenplay authorized by TKC has been and will be seriously and irreparably degraded by the creation, marketing and release of an unauthorized feature film by Regency entitled In Time, which infringes TKC's copyright in Repent, Harlequin! In Time is scheduled to be released in theaters on October 28, 2011. 13. Repent, Harlequin! is one ofMr. Ellison's most famous works and his most precious assets. It is truly outrageous that Andrew Niccol and Regency have gone behind his back to create a movie based on this iconic and valuable work without any attempt to obtain his authorization or to accord him credit. 14. The similarity between In Time and Repent, Harlequin! is obvious and, DRINKER BIDDLE & LA01/1045905.1 - 4-
REATH LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW Los ANGELES COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 4 of 16 Page ID #:8
1 indeed, widely noted by critics who have seen advanced screenings. For example, 2 Richard Roeper states in his Fall Movie Preview that "In Time is based on a 3 brilliant story by the great Harlan Ellison .... " Similarly, the E-Street preview 4 states that In Time is "[b]ased on the Harlan Ellison story 'Repent, Harlequin, said 5 the Ticktockman .... '" 6 15. In Time copies key plot elements, themes, characters, events, 7 sequences and settings of Repent, Harlequin!, including without limitation, the 8 following: 9 a. Repent, Harlequin! takes place in a dystopian corporate future in 10 which everyone is allotted a specific amount of time to live. The 11 precise amount of time each person has left to live is known, 12 tracked on a time card, and subject to monitoring by a government 13 authority known as the "Master Timekeeper." In Time also takes 14 place in a dystopian corporate future in which everyone is allotted a 15 specific amount of time to live. The precise amount of time each 16 person has left to live is known, tracked on a luminescent clock 17 displayed on the ann, and subject to monitoring by a govermnent 18 authority known as the "Senior Timekeeper." 19 b. In Repent, Harlequin!, the amount of time an individual has left to 20 live may be manipulated, and breaking the rules of society results 21 in the deduction of time from the perpetrator's life. For example, 22 tardiness to work results in revocation of a commensurate amount 23 of time from one's life. Similarly, in In Time, the amount of time 24 one has left to live may be manipulated, and violations are punished 25 by deducting time from the perpetrator's life, such as for tardiness 26 to work or failure to meet one's quota. 27 c. In Repent, Harlequin!, when one's allotted time to live has expired, 28 DRINKER BIDDLE & LA01/1045905.1 instant death occurs by stoppage of the heart. This is precisely - 5 -
REATH LLP ----------------------------------1 ATTOKNEYS AT L AW COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND JURY TRlAL DEMAND Los ANCf.I. ES
Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 5 of 16 Page ID #:9
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 DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP AT LAW Los ANGELES LAOl! 1045905. 1 what happens to In Time characters, as well. d. In Repent, IIarlequin!, the constant threat of advancing the time of one's death by time revocation is the system used to force conformity with a highly regimented and oppressive society in which the masses are forced to adhere to a strict time schedule in their daily lives as they serve their corporate masters. Similarly, in In Time, the constant threat of imminent death by running out of one's allotted time is the system used to force conformity with a highly regimented and oppressive society in which the masses live short, brutish lives of poveliy in service to the wealthy corporate elite. e. The protagonist in Repent, Harlequin! rebels against the system in the hopes of destroying it and restoring freedom to the masses. He becomes an outlaw and a hero of the people by sabotaging the system in ways that disrupt the strict schedule and encourages people to enjoy their time. The protagonist in In Time also rebels against the system in the hopes of destroying it. He becomes an outlaw and a hero of the people by sabotaging the strict time distribution system by giving others more time to live. f. In Repent, Harlequin!, the protagonist's acts of defiance present a threat to the system of strict schedule control enforced by the Master Timekeeper and his staff, who monitor infractions from a central command post. The Master Timekeeper and his staff proceed to hunt down the protagonist, at first using wanted posters and eventually by resorting to informants and torture. Similarly, in In Time, the protagonist's acts of defiance present a threat to the system of strict time distribution control enforced by the Senior Timekeeper and his staff, who also monitor infractions from a - 6 -
COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 6 of 16 Page ID #:10
l 2 3 4 5 central command post. The Senior Timekeeper and his staff proceed to hunt down the protagonist, at first using electronic wanted posters and eventually employing a street gang that uses intimidation, torture and murder. 6 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT 7 (Against All Defendants) 8 16. TKC incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 15, inclusive, and 9 realleges them here as though fully set forth herein. 10 17. Repent, Harlequin! is an original work of authorship fixed in a 11 tangible means of expression that constitutes a literary work pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 12 § 102(a), and is subject to copyright protection under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 13 §§ 101 et seq. 14 18. TKC's exclusive rights extend to each protectable component of 15 Repent, Harlequin!, including the right to create derivative works such as an 16 adaptation of Repent, Harlequin! to a motion picture screenplay. 17 19. IKC has the right and standing to enforce its exclusive rights to 18 Repent, Harlequin! and its copyrightable component parts. 19 20. At all times material hereto, TKC has duly complied with all of the 20 provisions of the copyright laws of the United States applicable to Repent, 21 Harlequin!. 22 21. Defendants had access to Repent, Harlequin! because Repent, 23 Harlequin! was and is a successful, well known science fiction short story that was 24 and is widely distributed and continues to be sold and available throughout the 25 United States. 26 22. By producing and distributing In Time, Defendants have reproduced, 27 28 DRINKF.R BIDDLE & RE/\nl LLP ,\TTOKNJ:."l'S AT LAW LOS ANCELES-
copied, prepared derivative works based upon, and distributed copies of substantial portions of Repent, Harlequin!, including key plot elements, characters, events and LAOIlL045905.1 - 7 -
COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 7 of 16 Page ID #:11
1 sequences for their own use, without TKC's permission or authorization. 2 Defendants continue to do so. 3 23. Defendants' conduct constituted, and continues to constitute, 4 infringement upon TKC's exclusive rights to reproduce, copy, prepare derivative 5 works based upon, and distribute Repent, Harlequin!, all in violation of 17 U.S.C. 6 §§ 106 and 501. 7 24. Defendants' infringement was, and continues to be, intentional, 8 deliberate, willful, malicious and in blatant disregard ofTKC's exclusive rights. 9 25. Defendants' acts as alleged above have caused, and ifnot enjoined, 10 will continue to cause, irreparable damage to TKC's exclusive rights in a manner 11 that cannot be calculated or compensated solely by money damages. Accordingly, TKC is entitled to a preliminary and permanent injunction against Defendants and their officers, directors, employees, agents, representatives, affiliates, subsidiaries, distributors and all persons acting in concert with them, to stop their infringing conduct, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 502. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 26. TKC is further entitled to temporary and permanent orders impounding and disposing of all infringing materials, including but not limited to all originals, copies, reproductions and derivatives of In Time, in Defendants' possession, custody or control pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 503. 27. Defendants' infringing conduct has caused TKC to suffer damages and harm, including, but not limited to, lost derivative market exploitation opportunity, lost revenues and profits, lost market share, loss of goodwill and reputation, and other damages, including costs and attorneys' fees, the exact nature and extent of which will be proven at trial. 28. Accordingly, TKC is entitled to an award against Defendants for the recovery of Defendants , profits, ifany, TKC's actual damages or statutory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys' fees and costs, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §§ 504 and 505. DRINKER BIDDLE & LAO 1/ 1045905.1 - 8 -
REATH LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW Los ANGELES COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 8 of 16 Page ID #:12
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF FOR A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 2 (Against All Defendants) 3 29. TKC incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 28, inclusive, and 4 realleges them here as though fully set forth herein. 5 30. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists relating to the rights 6 and duties ofTKC and Defendants under the U.S. copyright laws in that TKC 7 contends that Defendants' use, reproduction, marketing, sale, and distribution of In 8 Time infringe upon TKC's exclusive copyrights. Upon information and belief, 9 Defendants contend that their use, reproduction, marketing, sale, and distribution of 10 In Time are lawful. 11 31. Pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 & 2202, 12 and Rule 57 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, TKC desires ajudicial 13 determination of its rights, and a declaration of whether Defendants' use, 14 reproduction, marketing, sale, and distribution of In Time infringe upon TKC's exclusive rights in violation of the U.S. copyright laws. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 32. A judicial declaration is necessary and appropriate at this time under the circumstances in order that TKC may ascertain the parties' rights. PRA YER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, TKC prays for judgment against Defendants as follows: 1. That Defendants, and each of them, be adjudged to have infringed TKC's copyrights, in violation of 17 U.S.C. §§ 106 and 501; 2. That Defendants, and each of them, and their respective officers, directors, employees, agents, representatives, affiliates, subsidiaries, distributors and all persons acting in concert with them, be forthwith preliminarily and thereafter permanently enjoined from infringing TKC's copyrights, pursuant to 17 U.s.C. § 502; 3. That Defendants, and each of them, and their respective officers, DRINKER BIDDLE & LAO 11 1045905.1 - 9 -
REATH LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND Los ANGELES Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 9 of 16 Page ID #:13
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 DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP AT LAW Los ANGELES directors, employees, agents, representatives, affiliates, subsidiaries, distributors and all persons acting in concert with them, be forthwith preliminarily and thereafter permanently ordered to impound and dispose of all infringing materials, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 502; 5. That Defendants, and each of them, be directed to file with this Court and serve on TKC, by and through its counsel of record herein, within thirty (30) days after service of any such injunctions, a report in writing, under oath, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which Defendants have complied with the injunctions and orders described above; 6. That Defendants, and each of them, be required to account to TKC for any and all profits derived by their respective exploitation of In Time; 7. That Defendants, and each of them, be ordered to pay over to TKC all damages, including future damages, that TKC has sustained, or will sustain, as a consequence of the acts complained of herein, subject to proof at trial, and that TKC be awarded any profits derived by Defendants as a result of said acts, or as determined by said accounting, or in the alternative, statutory damages, pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504; 8. For a judicial declaration that Defendants' use, reproduction, marketing, sale, and distribution of In Time infringe TKC's exclusive rights under the copyright laws; 9. That TKC be awarded its costs, attorneys' fees and expenses in this action pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 505; 10. That TKC be awarded pre-judgment interest; and LAO II 1045905.1 -10-
COMPLAINT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 10 of 16 Page ID #:14
11. hat TKC have such other and further relief as the COlirt may deem 2 appropriate. 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 Dated: September 14, 2011 Attorneys for Plaintiff The Kiltmanjaro Corporation DRINK!;R BIDDLE&: LAOI / I 04590S. 1 - 11-
REATH Ll. P t.. us A .lilE-S
COMPLAINT FORCOPYRIGH INFRINGEMENT AND JURY TRJAL DEMAND Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 11 of 16 Page ID #:15
1 JURy TRIAL DEMAND 2 Plaintiff IKC hereby demands a trial by jury. 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 Dated: September 14,2011 PlaiIltiff . The Kil1manJaro CorporatlOn DRINKER BIDDI.e& LAOI/ I04590-.1 - 12 -
RE/\TrI LLP ,\ TT01U';EY5 AT LAW La" ASCF.LB COMPLAlNT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AN D JURY nUAL DEMAND Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 12 of 16 Page ID #:16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA NOTJCE OF ASSlGNMENT TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR DISCOVERY This case has been assigned to District Judge John F. Walter flnd the assigned discovery Magistrate Judge is Jacqueline Chooljian. The case number on all documents filed with the Court should read as follows: CVll- 75?5 JFW (JCX) Pursuant to General Order 05·07 of the United States District Court fOf the Centml District of California, the Magistrate Judge has been designated to bear discovery relatc:d motions. IIIOTICE TO COUNSEL A copy of this notics must be served with thfil $ummons and complaint on all defendants (If a removal t/ctlon Is flied. it copy of this MOoe must be served on all plaintiffs). Subsequent documents must be at the follOwing location: [Xl Western Division 312 N. Spring St .. Rm. G-8 Los Angeles, CA 90012 U Souther... Dlv1slon 411 WIst FOLlrth St., Rm.1·D53 Santa Ana, CA 92701-4516 Failure It;> file OIt the ptoper loeal)on wlll result In your oocumente being rell1l'n91t 10 you, [J eastern Division 3470 Twelfth St., Am. 134 Riverside, CA 92501 cv·,a (OSI06) NOTIC"; OF TO UNITEO STATfOS MAGISTRATE JUDGi: CISCQvgRY Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 13 of 16 Page ID #:17
DIUNKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP Christopher F. Wong (142507) chris.wong@dbr.coll1 Adam J. ThLlrstOn (162636) adam.thurston@dbr,com Ryan Salsig (250830) ryan,salsig@dbr.com 1800 Century Park East, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, Calitornia 90067-1517 Telephone:(31 0) 203-4000 Facsimile:(310 229-1285 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA THE KILlMANJARO CORPORATION
j a California CAsr:NUMBp.R Corporation, V. I'LMNTlFF(S) eVil· 0 7 5 7 51ff1 (JlxJ NEW REGENCY PRODUCTIONS,INC., a California -------- - ---------
corporatiOll; ANDREW NICCOL, all individual; and DOES 1 10, inclusive, SUMMONS TO:DEFENDANT(S): NEW REGENCY PRODUCTIONS, INC., a California corporation; ANDREW NICCOL, an individual; and DOeS 1 through 10, inclusive. A laws\.\h has been filed againsl Within n days after service ofthi:> summons on you (not counting tlle day you received it), you nmst serve 011 lhe plaintiff an answer to the attached I8l complaint D __ amended complaint o COllnterclaim 0 cross"claim or a motion under R1.!1e 12 of the Federal Rules ofClvil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff's attorney, DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH Christopher Wong / Adam Th\,u'ston, whose address is ] 800 Cenmrv Park East, Stute 1400, Los Angeles, California 90Q9..7 ·1517. If you fail to do S0, by default will be entered ag.unst you for the relief demanded in the cDmplaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court. SEP 1 4 2011 . By: __ "" Deputy Clerk Dated: ------------.-----------
(Seal oflhe. COllrt) [USB 60 d(l)ls if the defendant is fhft Uniled Slates Dr a United Slales agency, or ill an ojflcer or employee of the United States. If /lDwed 60 days b)l Rule 11(a)(3)). CV·OIA (12/07) LAO!I !04593rJ,l SllMMONS Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 14 of 16 Page ID #:18
'- . " UNITED STATES DlSTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DlSTR1CT Of CALlFORNIA CIVIL COVEll I (II) PlAINTIFFS ("'lwk bo); ifyuu ate '\.'f1T1!scl1ting ),lluIselfD) 1)Ii:FENPANTS THE KILIMANJARO CORPORATION. a Califomia NEW REGENCY PRODUCTIONS, INC., a corporation; Corpol'ation NICCOL, an individual; and POES 1 thrc,ugh I D, incll.lsivc (11) Ano,.ncys (Pirlll Address find NUIl'1bcr. II' you lire A[lCIllley.' (I f Known 1 DruNKER BIDDLE & REA TH LLP Christopher F. (142507) Adam Thurston (162636) 1800 Ct:nrury Suite 1400 Los Angeles, Califomia 90067- J 517 Telephone:(31 0) 203·4000 I Facsimile:(310) 229- J 285 . II. !lASIS OF JlITUSDICTION IPlace 8n X j" olla box nnIY.) III. CITIZENSI'IIP OF PRINCIPAL P .... For Divetsity Only lPlnce An X i" one: box For DlllinliIfQlld Oil': ror dcfendant.) . p 1 U.S. Plainliff r8l3 Fct\cl1ll Question (ll,::;. l"fF DF.F r'fF OF.F' (lClvcrmncn! Naill Ciliz¢ll nrThis STAle 01 01 Dr 04 04 P 2U.S. (1ovenlme"t ()eli!ndllilt or in this Stnle o DiYcrslly Citil.ell:lhill Ciuzell of StUle 02 WId Principu: Os Os ot" Pnnles it' II;m Ill) in An(l\her StHlC CItizen O( Sllh.lcCI (If 11 Ford!:" Counlry 0.3 r.oreim, NIlLion 0606 IV, ORTGIN IPlu<a::IiI X box onlv. ) f811 to 2 f!'Om p 3 RIlI\l<mded rronl 10 t, Rdnstamd or o 5 t"r0111 Ilnuthtr district (specify); b6MlIlli. t;:1 7 Oistricl I'roteedh,s St:lIe COllrl API'c:llam CourL Judge [rom LillAQtjon MIIJ:b;\Jollc Jud!;c V, IN cOMPLAIN1', JURV DEMAND: ya TI No (Check 'Ycr only hi CLA..I:;S AeT10N under r..R.C,I'_ 23: 0 Yes No 181 MONF..Y OIi:MAND1.P IN COMPLAINT: !Ii To,oO \11. CAUSE OF ACTION lCiTt Iht U. S. Civil undtr willdl you Rrt filing and write II orcause. Do IWI cileJurisdictionul sllItlites lin less dlver.qily.) Coeyright inirillBement under the ACI, 17 U,S.C. 10\ sel]l VIl.)'IIATURE OF StilT IPhltt UII X In one bux DillY.! • :t:: is;'; ;:" .- ... , .. - .... " . - . . '.: ··IJ'.oh.lfs: . .. _ . · : .. . tORTS. :' :". J .. .' : (". .:. ":. : •• .... . .. _ •• •• _., . .... ·(CON'rR:AcT. o 400 SUlle RllallPl1rtiulltl1cnt d ...... -
· .: '.-. llff!Ci9.NN: '. :. :-.' .. pmrrtoNs' :: . p-' i o 410 AmilrusL o 120Mllrine 8 ' 310 _. : PROPERTY·.' ···· b 5 i 0 lO' Acl tr-·· ........ _-_.' B <\30 und Bftnklng o 1:10 Miller Acl 31 S Ploduct 370 Olher S I-Illbeas o no J...abDrfMsml. Comlllvl'ceIIC(: B 140 NCllotiuble I-illbility g 3'71 Truth in Cc11'us 1 o n.0 Assault, Libel 0380 Ollm 8"°°'"=' p L!lbor/Msmt. o 460 Deporflltil;!n OverpllYI1\elll &; SltlIIdcr · Prep my Oumosc 5.35 Dcftlll pel\al!} Rep(lr1ing& o 4 70 h,flu¢IlCCu of p 330 Fed, cmployol1\' o 3!1;i Propeny 540 M\lIIdall1Usl ACl !bl I-iubility Olllcr o 740 ACt 151 Medit:/lrllAct S ... o 550 Civil Rights 79U OLher Labor o 480 COrnillll1tr Crollil o 152 of Detimll(tl 345 Marine o l2 USC o SSS "rl$o11 Comlition Litiamion o 490 CPhlclSOl TV Loan (t:xcl. I-lubiliI), ISPo :. . . ID '79', Empl. h,t. 0810 Seleclive Velernns) C\350 MOlor (0 WithdrawRI28 .. , .... Secur;t)' Aill o 8S0 0153 Rceovay of p MOlor USC 157 8-6i 0 ..... . ;: _. ElCCitMgo Ovt:rpllylllcniof I-iobilit)" ;:.;civil:.·Rioj,IT$· 6'ZO Olher Food & 181821) ClIpyrights 087' CustomerChlll1engc: 12 VecerRn'li Benefits o 360 Other [j'441 _. Ol'tlg lQ 831) l' IQ 160 Slockholdcrs' Sl,ic, Inj\ll)' o 44:1. fimploymcnl p 615 DruS '-'" -.' . o 890 Oilier SllIllIlOry o 190 0111cr CDJllrllCL o 362 Pmcllal I!\iIlTY-
ID 443 Se;iZllTt of . t& saa5!rol('f . o 891 Asricllilurni Atl P 195 Contrpcl Product Mc:d mmodlllions l'ropwy 21 USC o 6" ---
o 892 F.canomic 1.IQbility P 365 0444 881 86 Blpck Luns (923) ACI o 1% Fl:ftl)chlsc ProduCt l-;abilllY lEi AmOf;can with B 630 1.lquClr LBWS o 86l OIWCIDIWW o 8\13 .:J!,-: aP.At. )fitiDj,lE¥.:ty ' :;" , o 3611 AsbtSlOS Distlbil illes - 640 R.R.& Tille" 405(Jl») o 894 EnelS), Mt §, i", G;d "'",m;;'ti''' "" InJury EnlployrncM Q 650 Airline: Ress 8.864 SSIP XVI 0895 fre,,4oiTl of In I". Act 2.20 r:oreclo3ur" Lilll1iliLy o H61\Illcricun with o 660 865 ItSI (-10S(S» : ··'IMMiGiwl'IQN ... o 90Cl Appeal Dotcnni- 2.30 RClIIl_euse &. EJCollml1\l p .... -........ _ .. _ . . -
io IHetllth . l,aliQn Under P.'lllul o 140 T011S 10 Lnnd Nntllruli:tAl\on Orill:l' 69001llet 870 (U.S. Pillimiff LO Justice o 245 TOrI LilllllliLy Application o 440 QLtttr Ci"il ar Det,n!\unl) o 950 COllstilulionaliry Ot'SIOIt: p 290 All Ol."t:f Real Propel'lY o 46.l1-labm CotPU5-
Riglns p Q11 IRS·Third Pany 26 Ali!:" Deminec Statutes p '1(,5 lmm/llnlTion USC 7609 .. .. - -
OFFICii: USE ON I. V: CAse Number: I -p 11 1 1 .. -'1 I r;;. [ iIii AFTER COMPLETING TIIE cy-YCf>MI'f"E1\ T1Ti? tNFORMATION R£OUESTtD uELOW. CV-71 (OS/OK) CIVIL COVER SHE!:."!' \I\m
can LO[!aillal, II1C I I PAQO I Df2 www.l"ormIWQr<t!ow.aom Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 15 of 16 Page ID #:19
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL COVER SHEET VII 1(11). IDENTICAL CASES: Has this action been previously filed in this court and dismissed, remanded or closed? (gJ No 0 Yes If yes, list case number(s): I ""Itb). RELATED CASES: Have any cases been previously filed in this court that are related to the present case? (gJ No 0 Yes If yes, list case number(s): I Civil cases are deemed related if a previously filed case and the present case: Check all boxes that apply) D A. Arise from the same or closely related transactions, happenings, or events; or D B. Call for detennination of the same or substantially related or similar questions of law and fact; or Dc. For other reasons would entail substantial duplication oflabor if heard by different judges; or D D. Involve the same patent, trademark or copyright, and one of the factors identified above in a, b or c also is present. LX. VENUE: (When completing the following infonnation, use an additional sheet ifnecessary.) a) List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than California; or Foreign Country, in which EACH named plaintiff resides. D Check here if the government, its agencies or employees is a named plaintiff. If this box is checked, go to item (b). County in this District" Cal ifornia County outside of this District; State. if other than California; or Foreign Country The Kilimanjaro Corporation: Los Angeles County, California b) List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than California; or Foreign Country, in which EACH named defendant resides. (gJ Check here jfthe govemment, its agencies or employees is a named defendant. If this box is checked, go to item (c). County in this District:" California County outside of this District; State, if other than California; or Foreign Country Andrew Niccol: Los Angeles County, California New Regency Productions, Inc.: Los Angeles County, California c) List the County in this District; California County outside of this District; State if other than Califomia; or Foreign Country, in which EACH claim arose. Note: In land condemnation cases, use the location of the tract of land involved. County in this District:" Califomia COllnty outside ofthis District; State, if other than California; or Foreign Country Los Angeles County, California • Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, River ide. Vcnlnm. Santa Barba.,:,·a, or San Luis Obispo Counties Note: In land condemnation cases, use the locatloll of 'the Iraclbi'lnncl X. SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PRO PER): I X-.\..... IOate ISeptember 14,2011 Adam J. -
Notice to Counsel/Parties: The CV-71 (JS-44) Civil Cover Sheet and the infornlation contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law. This fonn, approved by the Judicial Conference of tile United States in September 1974, is required pursuant to Local Rule 3 -I is not filed but is used by tile Clerk of tile Court for the purpose of statistics, venue and initiating the civil docket sheet. (For more detailed instructions, see separate instructions sheet.) CV -71 (05/08) CIVIL COVER SHEET Page 2 of2 American LegalNet, Inc wwwFormsWorkflow.com Case 2:11-cv-07575-JFW -JC Document 1 Filed 09/14/11 Page 16 of 16 Page ID #:20
Recommended DocumentsDocuments Similar To Complaint Harlan Ellison in TimeSkip carouselComplaint With LogoRegents of University of California v. Aisen - copyright ownership federal jurisdiction.pdfThe Art of Design ComplaintCopyright ChecklistKepner-Tregoe, Inc. v. Victor H. Vroom, 186 F.3d 283, 2d Cir. (1999)At Least I TriedBrand Loyalty SurveyContract for the Manufacture and Sale of GoodsZanfel Laboratories et. al. v. Garcoa LaboratoriesLetter of Authorization to NegotiateYesh Music v. S Carter Enterprises - class action complaint royalties TIDAL.pdfChicago Copyright ComplaintShapiro CH4 SolutionTwentieth Century Music Corporation and Mary M. Bourne v. George Aiken, 500 F.2d 127, 3rd Cir. (1974)Checklist Workers Compensation ClaimsdcaereokillerCheck Please$RMGO5NFEastern Standard Tribe by Cory DoctorowCory Doctorow - Eastern Standard TribeObliCon Cases 1Westward Basic (6632021)TGM Initiative Cards IntroE6v3 rulesetsWARRAScavs SwagAvtec Systems, Incorporated v. Jeffrey G. Peiffer Kisak-Kisak, Incorporated Paul F. Kisak, Avtec Systems, Incorporated v. Jeffrey G. Peiffer Kisak-Kisak, Incorporated, and Paul F. Kisak, 21 F.3d 568, 4th Cir. (1994)CGR Corporation v. Treyes, Jr.Third BatikDocuments About Copyright Law Of The United StatesSkip carouselPerfect 10 v TumblrTeller v. Dodge March 2014Yesh Music v. S Carter Enterprises - class action complaint royalties TIDAL.pdfMyEx.com LawsuitGuide to copyright (1 MB)Getty Images v. Advernet Decision (Southern District of NY)Minder Music v. Grande (Jimmy Castor Bunch v. Grande)Data General v. Grumman Systems, 36 F.3d 1147, 1st Cir. (1994)Bretillot v. Burrow - maps copyright complaint.pdfAmerican Visuals Corporation v. Frederick A. Holland and Sam Schwartz, 239 F.2d 740, 2d Cir. (1956)Business Trends Analysts, Inc. v. The Freedonia Group, Inc. And the Freedonia Group, Incorporated, 887 F.2d 399, 2d Cir. (1989)Wallert v. Atlan - Starlight copyright infringement second amended complaint.pdfThomas Wilson & Company, Inc. v. Irving J. Dorfman Company, Inc., 433 F.2d 409, 2d Cir. (1970)Masterfile vs. ChagaWerner v. ViralNova Complaint - With Cover Page and Exhibits[3]Edwards v. Usher - Caught Up Copyright OpinionSteve Ray vs. ESPNO'Well Novelty Co v. Offenbacher, 4th Cir. (2000)Barre v. BeyonceCapitol Records LLC Et Al v (1)Iconic Images v. Corbis (Obama Photos)Masterfile vs Obstetrics, Gynecology, InfertilitySolid Oak v. Take-Two Aug. 2 OrderDjerrahian v. Source.pdfLinda M. Ellis (Linda's Lyrics) vs. Eric J. Aronson & Dash SystemsU.S. Payphone, Inc. v. Executives Unlimited of Durham, Inc., Amerigraphix, Incorporated, American Multimedia, Inc., and Bill Britt, David Riley, U.S. Payphone, Inc. v. Executives Unlimited of Durham, Inc., Amerigraphix, Incorporated, American Multimedia, Inc., and Bill Britt, David Riley, 931 F.2d 888, 4th Cir. (1991)Christopher Phelps & Associates, LLC v. R. Wayne Galloway v. Simonini Builders, Incorporated, Third Party Donald A. Gardner Architects, Incorporated Donald A. Gardner, Incorporated Frank Betz Associates, Incorporated, Amici Supporting, 477 F.3d 128, 3rd Cir. (2007)Eli Attia D/B/A Eli Attia Architects v. Society of the New York Hospital A/K/A the New York Hospital, Hellmuth Obata & Kassabaum, Inc., Taylor Clark Architects, Inc., and Hok/tca Associated Architechts, P.C., 201 F.3d 50, 2d Cir. (1999)Streetwise Maps, Inc., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. Vandam, Inc., a Corporation of the State of New York, and Steven Meuth, Also Known as Stephan Van Dam, Defendants-Counter-Claimants-Appellees, 159 F.3d 739, 2d Cir. (1998)Lixenberg v. Spotify - Biggie photograph copyright complaint.pdfMore From mschwimmerSkip carouselMarshak v Schaffner Marvelettesbelair v mgaComplaint Cayman Jack v Jack DanielsDecision SDNY Personal Jursidcition VenueDecision Gosmile v Levine Re Wo PrjudiceDecision 2d Cir Lv v LyShiga Japan RevisionABC v Aereo ComplaintPenn Response to LvLv to Penn Demand LetterComplaint MeltwaterDecision Secalt Tirak Trade Dress Shapeumg CopyComplaint PreschooliansComplaint GloveablesDraft Discussion Draft CopyComplaint Acme Widget q LogoTtab Cavern Club 2(a)Ttab Cavern Club 2(a)Complaint Cavern Club NevadaBrief False Advertising Calico CornersComplaint SituationComplaint in n Out BoomerangComplaint Skull CandyComplaint Boost OhioComplaint Varsity MsgComplaint Rim BbxComplaint Ferracuti Law FirmComplaint Biggest LoserDecision Tree Freshner Getty