Opinion ID: 804992
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: NUNEZ, Jr.; VILLAGE ROADSHOW,

Text: LTD, an Australian Corporation; PARADISO ENTERTAINMENT, INC., a New York corporation; ENTERTAINMENT FILM DISTRIBUTORS LTD, a British corporation; METROPOLITAN FILMEXPORT, a French corporation; ALLIANCE FILMS, INC., FKA Alliance Atlantis Communications Inc., DBA Motion Picture Distribution LP; YLEISRADIO OY, a Finnish company, AKA YLE; FS FILM OY, a Finnish company; THE ENDEAVOR AGENCY, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; ADRIANA ALBERGHETTI, individually and as an agent of The Endeavor Agency, LLC; FILM INDEPENDENT, INC., a California corporation, FKA Independent Feature Project/West; TURNER BROADCASTING SYSTEM, INC., a Georgia corporation; CW MEDIA SALES INC./CW VENTES MEDIA INC., a Canadian corporation; CANWEST GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS CORP., a Canadian corporation; PARADISO HOME ENTERTAINMENT, a Dutch company; SANTA FE PRODUCTIONS NV, a Belgian Public Limited Liability Company, DBA Paradiso Entertainment; 2 PARADISO ENTERTAINMENT NEDERLANDS BV, a Dutch Private Limited Company; CW MEDIA, INC., a Canadian Corporation, formerly known as Alliance Atlantis Communications Inc., doing business as Motion Picture Distribution LP; DISTRIBUTION COMPANY, S.A., an Argentinian Company; JANE FONDA; JENNIFER LOPEZ, individually, and as an agent of Nuyorican Productions, Inc.; ROBERT LUKETIC; NEW LINE HOME ENTERTAINMENT, INC., a New York Corporation; NEW LINE INTERNATIONAL RELEASING, INC., a California Corporation; NEW LINE TELEVISION, INC., a California Corporation; WANDA SYKES; TIME WARNER INC., a Delaware Corporation; MICHAEL VARTAN; WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT, INC., a Delaware Corporation; WARNER BROS. HOME ENTERTAINMENT, INC., a Delaware Corporation, doing business as Warner Home Video, Inc.; WARNER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Delaware Corporation; WARNER HOME VIDEO, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California R. Gary Klausner, District Judge, Presiding 3 Submitted July 13, 2012  Pasadena, California Before: GILMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Sheri Gilbert appeals the district court’s orders dismissing and granting summary judgment to Appellees (collectively the “movie makers”), and awarding them attorney’s fees, on her claims of copyright infringement. Gilbert, the author of the screenplay When Mom’s the Other Woman (“The Other Woman”), asserts that Appellees, involved in the making of the 2005 movie Monster-in-Law, unlawfully copied drafts of her screenplay in violation of the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 101, et seq. We have jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The facts of this case are known to the parties. We need not repeat them here. The district court properly ruled that neither the Monster-in-Law film nor any of its preliminary drafts infringes any of the second, third, or fourth drafts of