Opinion ID: 604165
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Summary Judgment and Attorney's Fees

Text: 11 Having determined that the district court did not err in refusing to join ASCAP nor in striking Hunter's affirmative defenses and counterclaim, we must resolve whether the grant of summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs was proper. We review de novo the district court's grant of summary judgment. We will affirm only if there is no genuine issue of material fact and the plaintiffs are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Bank Leumi LeIsrael, B.M. v. Lee, 928 F.2d 232, 234 (7th Cir.1991). 12 Hunter does not dispute any of plaintiffs' allegations regarding infringement of the valid copyrights. In its Local Rule 12(m) Statement in opposition to plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, Hunter states, [t]he facts relied upon by Plaintiffs are immaterial because Plaintiffs and ASCAP are estopped from asserting them by the facts alleged in this paragraph 2. (R.43-3). Local Rule 12(m) provides in part that [a]ll material facts set forth in the statement required of the moving party will be deemed admitted unless controverted by the statement of the opposing party. Because Hunter failed to deny plaintiffs' facts setting forth a prima facie case of infringement, none of the five elements of infringement are in dispute. 9 Indeed, on appeal, Hunter does not challenge the conclusion that it infringed plaintiffs' valid copyrights. Thus, summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs was appropriate. 13 The only issue left for us to resolve is whether the district court abused its discretion in awarding attorney's fees and costs. Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 505, a district court may as an exercise of its statutory discretion award attorney's fees and costs to the prevailing party in a copyright infringement suit. Such an award will be reversed only upon an abuse of discretion. See Chi-Boy Music v. Charlie Club, Inc., 930 F.2d 1224, 1230 (7th Cir.1991). After examination of the record, we conclude that the district court soundly exercised its discretion, and the award of attorney's fees was appropriate.