Thomas v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation

Background

James E. Thomas and John Thomas wrote the screenplay for Predator, which was released in 1987. In 1986, they transferred rights in the screenplay, including the right of publication, to Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. In 2016, they sent Twentieth Century a notice attempting to end that transfer effective April 17, 2021, under 17 U.S.C. § 203. The parties disputed whether the notice was premature. The brothers later sent two alternative notices, and Twentieth Century sent counternotices identifying alleged deficiencies.

On April 15, 2021, the brothers filed this declaratory-relief action in the Northern District of California, asking the court to establish that their termination notices were valid. Two hours later, Twentieth Century filed a related action in the Central District of California, asking the court to establish that the notices were invalid. The brothers moved to enjoin, or block, the Central District case. Twentieth Century moved to dismiss this case for improper venue or, alternatively, to transfer it to the Central District.

Legal Standards

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a district court may transfer a civil action to another federal district where it could have been brought when doing so would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice. The moving party bears the burden of showing that transfer is appropriate, and the court has broad discretion to weigh convenience and fairness.

The court also considered the first-to-file rule, which allows a court to transfer, stay, or dismiss a later-filed action when a similar case was already filed in another federal court. The rule considers the timing of the lawsuits, the similarity of the parties, and the similarity of the issues. The court noted that the rule may be set aside for equitable reasons.

Analysis

The parties agreed that this case could have been brought in the Central District. The court found that no relevant acts occurred in the Northern District. The brothers lived in Santa Barbara, Twentieth Century had its principal place of business in Los Angeles County, and the witnesses and evidence were in the Central District. The parties’ lawyers were also in Los Angeles, and the negotiations concerning the dispute occurred there.

Because the Northern District had no meaningful connection to the dispute, the court gave the brothers’ choice of forum only minimal deference. The court also found that the Central District had a stronger local interest because the events occurred there and the parties resided there. These factors supported transfer under § 1404(a).

Twentieth Century argued that the court should dismiss the case instead of transferring it, in part because the brothers filed shortly before Twentieth Century filed its Central District action. The court recognized that argument but concluded that transfer would provide a faster and more orderly way to resolve the dispute in the Central District. The court did not decide whether the termination notices were valid.

Disposition

The court transferred the case to the Central District of California. Because of that ruling, it denied the brothers’ motion to enjoin the Central District case as moot. The order disposed of ECF Nos. 12 and 27.