Jennifer Tulley Architect, Inc. v. Shin
- Alex Tse
- 3:21-cv-00619
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
Jennifer Tulley Architect v. Shin: Judge Tse dismissed an unregistered copyright claim as premature and declined jurisdiction over related state claims.
Jennifer Tulley Architect, Inc.’s copyright-infringement and related state-law claims were affected. Jeannie Shin obtained dismissal of the infringement claim, while the court declined supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claims.
What happened
In Jennifer Tulley Architect, Inc. v. Shin, the plaintiff sued Jeannie Shin and others, alleging copyright infringement and related state-law claims. The plaintiff acknowledged that it was still waiting for the Copyright Office to register the copyright.
The court explained that a copyright must be registered or preregistered before an infringement lawsuit can proceed. Because neither had occurred, the infringement claim was not ready for review.
Judge Alex G. Tse granted Shin’s motion to dismiss the infringement claim and declined supplemental jurisdiction over the related state-law claims. The plaintiff may seek leave to replead those claims if the copyright is registered or preregistered.
The detailed version
- Jennifer Tulley Architect, Inc. v. Shin · No. 3:21-cv-00619
- Alex Tse
- Mar. 11, 2021
Background
Jennifer Tulley Architect, Inc. sued Jeannie Shin and other defendants. The complaint asserted a copyright-infringement claim and state-law claims arising from the same course of conduct. Shin moved to dismiss the claims and moved to strike a demand for punitive damages connected to one or more state-law claims.
Copyright Claim
The court held that the infringement claim was premature and not currently ripe for review. Under 17 U.S.C. § 411(a), the U.S. Copyright Office must register or preregister the copyright before the plaintiff may sue for infringement. Neither event had occurred, and the plaintiff admitted that it was still awaiting registration. The court therefore granted Shin’s motion to dismiss the infringement claim.
The court stated that the plaintiff may seek leave to amend its complaint to replead the infringement claim if registration or preregistration is obtained. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
State-Law Claims and Punitive-Damages Demand
Because the infringement claim could not proceed at that time, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the related state-law claims. The court stated that the plaintiff may replead those claims if the infringement claim later becomes viable. Shin may then renew her arguments seeking dismissal of those claims and her request to strike the punitive-damages demand. The opinion does not state a separate disposition granting or denying the motion to strike.
Disposition
The court granted the motion to dismiss the copyright-infringement claim and declined supplemental jurisdiction over the related state-law claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.