LaFarga v. Lowrider Arte Magazine

Full title: JOAQUIN LAFARGA. v. LOWRIDER ARTE MAGAZINE ET AL.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Aug 24, 2012

Facts

In August 2010, Defendant published an issue of Lowrider Arte Magazine which included six “full-page photographs and images of Plaintiff’s original oil paintings” without Plaintiff’s consent or authorization. Compl. at ¶ 9. Each of the oil paintings has been “signed by the [P]laintiff/artist Joaquin Lafarge,” and before the magazine’s publication, the works had never been exposed to the public. Id. at ¶¶ 10-14.

On October 13, 2011, Plaintiff filed the present Complaint pro se against Defendant alleging copyright infringement and actual damages in the amount of $250,000. Plaintiff alleges that at the time of publication, the oil paintings “were protected by copyright under the registered trademark of ‘NITEOWL’S ART,’ Trademark Application No. 78945717.” Id. at ¶ 12; see also Opp’n at 2 (Dkt. 13). On June 13, 2012, the Defendant brought the present Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

Issue

Decision

the Court DENIES Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiff’s Motion for Order Compelling United States Marshals Service to Comply with Court’s Order and Serve Complaint and Summons on Defendant.

However, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause why this Court should not dismiss for failing to allege copyright registration. The plaintiff shall file a Response on or before September 17, 2012. If Plaintiff fails to do so, this Court shall dismiss WITH PREJUDICE. If Defendant wishes to file a Reply to that Response or to this Order to Show Cause, Defendant must do so on or before October 1, 2012.

The Clerk shall serve a copy of this minute order on counsel for all parties in this action. MINUTES FORM 11
CIVIL-GEN

Related Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

three + 3 =