47 Leonard v. Clark, 12 F.3d 885, 889 (9th Cir. 1993); Ostlund v. Bobb, 825 F.2d 1371, 1373 (9th Cir. 1987). 48 Leonard, 12 F.3d at 889. 49 Collazo v. Estelle, 940 F.2d 411, 415 (9th Cir. 1991).

Accordingly, NAF has established a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver. See Leonard, 12 F.3d at 890. 3.

NovaLogic’s “surrender” argument also is not supported (and in fact is contradicted) by the caselaw. In both Snepp v. United States, 444 U.S. 507, 514- 15 (1980) (per curiam) and Leonard, 12 F.3d at 891-92, the defendants clearly and voluntarily contracted to refrain from certain specific activities – i.e., an ex-CIA agent publishing classified information (Snepp) or a union endorsing certain legislation (Leonard) – and were sued for breaching those contracts. The courts enforced these contracts, finding that even if they limited the defendants’ exercise of certain First Amendment rights, the defendants had knowingly surrendered those rights by contract.

Leonard v. Clark, 12 F.3d 885, 889-90 (9th Cir. 1993) (affirming district court decision not to reach the issue of whether a labor union’s free- speech rights had been violated where the district court had first determined that the union waived its First Amendment protections in a collective bargaining agreement); Erie Telecomms. v. Erie, 853 F.2d 1084, 1096 (3d Cir. 1988)

“The general rule applicable to federal court suits with multiple plaintiffs is that once the court determines that one of the plaintiffs has standing, it need not decide the standing of the others.” Leonard v. Clark, 12 F.3d 885, 888 (9th Cir. 1993) (citing Carey v. Population Services Int'l, 431 U.S. 678, 682 (1977)). Should the Court determine that either Case3:12-cv-05809-WHA Document36 Filed02/25/13 Page20 of 21 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 - 18 - OPPOSITION TO MOION TO DISMISS 12-05809 WHA Regal Vegan or ALDF has standing, then, it need not, as a matter of judicial efficiency, undergo a full standing analysis for the other.

Case4:09-cv-03329-CW Document110 Filed11/03/09 Page9 of 21 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 5 DEFENDANT NCAA'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS Case No. 4:09-cv-03329-CW any actual, personal injury as a result of the alleged violation. Id.; see also Leonard v. Clark, No. 91-35770, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 36532, at *11 (9th Cir. Dec. 27, 1993) (plaintiffs lacked standing because they failed to allege "the personal actual or threatened injury necessary") (emphasis in original). O'Bannon's allegations are similarly deficient.

Irrespective of First Amendment rights it might have had, EA agreed by contract not to use student-athlete likenesses in its videogames, thereby waiving any potential First Amendment right to do so. ¶¶ 13-15; Leonard v. Clark, 12 F.3d 885, 889-90 (9th Cir. 1993) (affirming district court decision not to reach the issue of whether a labor union’s free-speech rights had been violated where the district court had first determined that the union waived its First Amendment protections in a collective bargaining agreement); Erie Telecomms. v. Erie, 853 F.2d 1084, 1096 (3d Cir. 1988) (“constitutional rights, like rights and privileges of lesser importance, may be contractually waived”).

Irrespective of First Amendment rights it might have had, EA agreed by contract not to use student-athlete likenesses in its videogames, thereby waiving any potential First Amendment right to do so. ¶¶ 13-15; Leonard v. Clark, 12 F.3d 885, 889-90 (9th Cir. 1993) (affirming district court decision not to reach the issue of whether a labor union’s free-speech rights had been violated where the district court had first determined that the union waived its First Amendment protections in a collective bargaining agreement); Erie Telecomms. v. Erie, 853 F.2d 1084, 1096 (3d Cir. 1988) (“constitutional rights, like rights and privileges of lesser importance, may be contractually waived”).

... 14 Far Out Productions v. Oskar, 247 F.3d 986 (9th Cir. 2001) ................................................................................................ 14 Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467 (9th Cir. 1997) .............................................................................................. 26 GTE Inc. v. Continental T.V., Inc, 537 F.2d 980 (9th Cir. 1976) ................................................................................................ 14 In re September 11 Litigation, 621 F. Supp. 2d 131 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) ..................................................................................... 6 Landow v. Wachovia Securities, LLC, 966 F. Supp. 2d 106 (E.D.N.Y. 2013) .................................................................................. 25 LC Capital Partners, LP v. Frontier Insurance Group, Inc., 318 F.3d 148 (2d Cir. 2003).................................................................................................. 25 Leonard v. Clark, 12 F.3d 885 (9th Cir. 1993) .................................................................................................. 14 Newcal Industries v. Ikon Office Solution, 513 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2008) ....................................................................................... passim Omega Environmental Inc.

It is, therefore, appropriate to dismiss the claims asserted by the Business Plaintiffs. 6 The principal case on which Plaintiffs rely, National Ass’n of Optometrists & Opt., cites for the proposition, Preminger v. Peake, 552 F.3d 757 (9th Cir. 2008), which, in turn, cites Leonard v. Clark, 12 F.3d 855 (9th Cir. 1993). In the Leonard case, however, despite restating the general principle, the Ninth Circuit, because of a peculiarity of that case, had to separately investigate the standing of the different plaintiff groups.