Iglesia Ni Cristo v. Cayabyab
- Beth Freeman
- 5:18-cv-00561
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 19
In Iglesia Ni Cristo v. Cayabyab, Judge Freeman granted summary judgment for five defendants and granted in part and denied in part the motion for three others.
Iglesia Ni Cristo; defendants Luisito E. Cayabyab, Isaias T. Samson, Jr., Rolando Dizon, Jr., Lionel Roque De La Uso, Allan Monte De Ramos, Jeriel Nemis, Jesle Llaban Kuizon, Bernard Garcia, Liezl Diaz-DeoCampo, Edwin Lionel R. Mora, Allan Villaneueva, and H2O Now USA.
What happened
Iglesia Ni Cristo sued eight former ministers, officers, and members and H2O Now USA, alleging that they used Iglesia Ni Cristo’s name, seals, flag, and hymns in ways that suggested an affiliation. The claims included federal trademark and copyright claims and California unfair-competition claims.
The court excluded unauthenticated internet screenshots but considered the witness declarations. It found enough evidence to create factual disputes about trademark use by Luisito E. Cayabyab, Rolando Dizon, Jr., and H2O Now USA. It found no sufficient evidence of trademark use by Lionel Roque De La Uso, Allan Monte De Ramos, Jesle Llaban Kuizon, Edwin Lionel R. Mora, or Allan Villaneuva. It also found insufficient evidence of copyright infringement because Dizon’s worship-service performances were exempt and the record did not show that the defendants posted or published the hymn lyrics.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman granted the motion in its entirety for De La Uso, Ramos, Kuizon, Mora, and Villaneuva. She granted the motion as to the copyright claim and denied it as to the trademark-related claims against Cayabyab, Dizon, and H2O. Iglesia Ni Cristo received thirty days to file proof that Isaias T. Samson, Jr., and Jeriel Nemis were served; otherwise, those defendants would be dismissed for lack of service.
The detailed version
- Iglesia Ni Cristo v. Cayabyab · No. 5:18-cv-00561
- Beth Freeman
- Mar. 31, 2020
Background
Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC), a nonprofit religious corporation, sued eleven former ministers, officers, and members and H2O Now USA (H2O), a nonprofit religious corporation formed by some of them. INC alleged that the defendants held themselves out as affiliated with INC and used INC’s trademarked name, Seal, Executive Seal, and Flag, as well as copyrighted hymns. The operative complaint asserted claims for false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, trademark infringement under the Lanham Act, copyright infringement, and unfair competition under California statutory and common law.
H2O and eight individual defendants moved for summary judgment on all claims. The court did not consider the motion as to Liezl Diaz-DeoCampo because of an automatic bankruptcy stay. Isaias T. Samson, Jr., Jeriel Nemis, and Bernard Garcia had not appeared; the court gave INC thirty days to file proof of service on Samson and Nemis and stated that failure to do so would result in their dismissal for failure to complete service.
Evidence and Trademark Claims
The moving defendants submitted declarations denying that they had used INC’s name or trademarks after leaving INC. Cayabyab also denied that H2O had used them. INC relied heavily on internet screenshots and witness declarations. The court sustained the objection to the screenshots because INC did not provide testimony from the person who took them or other evidence authenticating them. The court overruled objections to the witness declarations, including declarations that could be presented in admissible form at trial.
The court held that the declarations provided enough evidence to create genuine factual disputes about whether Cayabyab, Dizon, and H2O used INC’s name and other marks during online worship services and held themselves out as affiliated with INC. It therefore denied summary judgment as to Claims 1, 3, 4, and 5 for those defendants. The court found that INC’s evidence did not show trademark use by De La Uso, Ramos, Kuizon, Mora, or Villaneuva. It granted summary judgment in favor of those defendants on Claims 1, 3, 4, and 5.
The court declined to consider the moving parties’ argument about the likelihood of confusion because they raised that argument for the first time in their reply brief. The court also declined to treat INC’s references to ongoing discovery as a request to delay the motion because INC had not filed the required declaration or shown that additional discovery would prevent summary judgment.
Copyright Claim
Claim 2 alleged that Cayabyab, Dizon, and H2O infringed INC’s copyrights in hymns. Cayabyab stated that he and H2O had not used the hymns. Dizon admitted performing the hymns during worship services but denied copying, distributing, or publishing their lyrics. The court explained that the Copyright Act exempts performances of certain religious musical works during services at a place of worship or other religious assembly.
The court found that INC’s unauthenticated screenshots could not be considered and that none of its witness declarations stated that Cayabyab, Dizon, or H2O posted or otherwise published the hymn lyrics. Because INC failed to show a genuine factual dispute about copyright infringement, the court granted summary judgment as to Claim 2.
Disposition
The court ordered the following:
- The motion for summary judgment was granted in its entirety as to De La Uso, Ramos, Kuizon, Mora, and Villaneueva.
- As to Cayabyab, Dizon, and H2O, the motion was granted as to Claim 2 for copyright infringement and denied as to Claims 1, 3, 4, and
- 3. INC was granted thirty days to file proof of service on Samson and Nemis; failure to do so would result in dismissal of those defendants for failure to complete service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m).
Read the full 19-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.