From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schkeiban v. Cameron

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 4, 2012
CASE NO. CV 12-0636-R (MANx) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2012)

Summary

comparing a non-audiovisual script with an audiovisual movie to determine substantial similarity on a motion to dismiss

Summary of this case from Silas v. Home Box Office, Inc.

Opinion

CASE NO. CV 12-0636-R (MANx)

10-04-2012

ELIJAH SCHKEIBAN, an individual, Plaintiff, v. JAMES CAMERON, an individual; LIGHTSTORM ENTERTAINMENT, INC., a California corporation; TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; DUNE ENTERTAINMENT LP, a Delaware limited partnership, Defendants.

ROBERT H. ROTSTEIN (SBN 72452), ELAINE K. KIM (SBN 242066), MITCHELL SILBERBERG & KNUPP LLP 11377 West Olympic Boulevard Attorneys for Defendants, James Cameron, Lightstorm Entertainment, Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Dune Entertainment LP


ROBERT H. ROTSTEIN (SBN 72452),

ELAINE K. KIM (SBN 242066),

MITCHELL SILBERBERG & KNUPP LLP

11377 West Olympic Boulevard

Attorneys for Defendants,

James Cameron, Lightstorm Entertainment, Inc.,

Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation,

Dune Entertainment LP

Honorable Manuel L. Real


JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF

DEFENDANTS JAMES CAMERON,

LIGHTSTORM ENTERTAINMENT,

INC.,

TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX

FILM CORPORATION, AND

DUNE ENTERTAINMENT LP

JUDGMENT

The Court, having granted the motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint in its entirety pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure of James Cameron, Lightstorm Entertainment, Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. and Dune Entertainment LP, based on the Court's determination that Plaintiff Elijah Schkeiban's Second Amended Complaint failed to state a claim for relief and that Defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law on all causes of action against them,

IT IS NOW, THEREFORE, HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED, that judgment is entered in this action as follows:

1. Plaintiff Elijah Schkeiban shall recover nothing from Defendants James Cameron, Lightstorm Entertainment, Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. and Dune Entertainment LP;

2. Defendants James Cameron, Lightstorm Entertainment, Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. and Dune Entertainment LP shall have judgment in their favor on all causes of action set forth in the Second Amended Complaint; and

3. Defendants James Cameron, Lightstorm Entertainment, Inc., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. and Dune Entertainment LP shall recover from Plaintiff Elijah Schkeiban their costs in the sum of $ ____________.

The Clerk is ordered to enter this Judgment.

____________

The Manuel L. Real

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Schkeiban v. Cameron

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 4, 2012
CASE NO. CV 12-0636-R (MANx) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2012)

comparing a non-audiovisual script with an audiovisual movie to determine substantial similarity on a motion to dismiss

Summary of this case from Silas v. Home Box Office, Inc.
Case details for

Schkeiban v. Cameron

Case Details

Full title:ELIJAH SCHKEIBAN, an individual, Plaintiff, v. JAMES CAMERON, an…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Oct 4, 2012

Citations

CASE NO. CV 12-0636-R (MANx) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2012)

Citing Cases

Silas v. Home Box Office, Inc.

First, courts regularly compare audiovisual and non-audiovisual works to determine whether works are…

Ricketts v. CBS Corps.

Similarly, the alleged theme of the struggles of an inner-city African American football star, Opp'n at…