19 Cited authorities

Lieb v. Topstone Industries, Inc.
788 F.2d 151 (3d Cir. 1986) Cited 549 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that remand is appropriate when a district court has failed to specify its reasons for denying a Rule 11 motion
Matthew Bender Co., Inc. v. West Pub. Co.
240 F.3d 116 (2d Cir. 2001) Cited 206 times
Finding that "[t]his emphasis on objective reasonableness is firmly rooted in Fogerty's admonition that any factor a court considers in deciding whether to award attorneys' fees must be faithful to the purposes of the Copyright Act"
Chiste v. Hotels.com L.P.
756 F. Supp. 2d 382 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) Cited 140 times
Holding that requests for injunctive relief are remedies and are dismissed with the underlying claim
Anti-Monopoly, Inc. v. Hasbro, Inc.
958 F. Supp. 895 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) Cited 105 times
In Anti-Monopoly, Inc. v. Hasbro, Inc., supra, 958 F.Supp. 895, 904, the plaintiff did submit the declaration and cross-elasticity reports of an expert economist "to satisfy its burden relating to market definition."
Brownstein v. Lindsay
742 F.3d 55 (3d Cir. 2014) Cited 47 times
Holding that, while courts may invalidate underlying copyrights, the Copyright Act gives federal courts no authority to cancel copyright registrations with the U.S. Copyright Office
Malibu Media, LLC v. Flanagan
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:13-CV-5890 (E.D. Pa. Jun. 30, 2014) Cited 45 times
Finding that identity was sufficiently alleged to grant default judgment in a BitTorrent copyright case where Plaintiff identified “Defendant's online activities, hobbies, and interest implicate he was the infringer, and not his wife.”
Jain v. McGraw–Hill Cos.
827 F. Supp. 2d 272 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) Cited 49 times
Holding that the plaintiff abandoned six claims when her brief failed to respond to the defendants' arguments on those claims
MiTek Holdings, Inc. v. Arce Engineering Co.
198 F.3d 840 (11th Cir. 1999) Cited 61 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a District Court "should consider not whether the losing party can afford to pay the fees but whether the imposition of fees will further the goals of the Copyright Act."
Weinstein Co. v. Smokewood Entertainment Group
664 F. Supp. 2d 332 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) Cited 31 times 1 Legal Analyses
In Weinstein, the plaintiff brought a breach of contract action and argued that an email exchange between it and the defendant copyright co-owner codified a prior oral agreement to transfer exclusive distribution rights and satisfied § 204(a).
Contractual Obligation Productions, LLC v. AMC Networks, Inc.
546 F. Supp. 2d 120 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) Cited 25 times
Holding that plaintiff's legal theories concerning its standing to pursue a copyright infringement claim are objectively unreasonable because the plaintiff was notice that the courts had already determined that plaintiff did not have standing to assert a claim under the Copyright Act
Rule 54 - Judgment; Costs
Fed. R. Civ. P. 54 Cited 41,232 times 141 Legal Analyses
Holding party seeking fees may additionally seek "nontaxable expenses"
Rule 65 - Injunctions and Restraining Orders
Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 Cited 22,449 times 87 Legal Analyses
Recognizing court's ability to enter emergency order with less than full adversary hearing and even, in appropriate circumstances, without notice
Section 505 - Remedies for infringement: Costs and attorney's fees
17 U.S.C. § 505 Cited 2,974 times 70 Legal Analyses
Granting the district court discretion to award attorney's fees to the prevailing party in copyright cases

MARINO v. USHER

19 Cited authorities

Holding that remand is appropriate when a district court has failed to specify its reasons for denying a Rule 11 motion

Finding that "[t]his emphasis on objective reasonableness is firmly rooted in Fogerty's admonition that any factor a court considers in deciding whether to award attorneys' fees must be faithful to the purposes of the Copyright Act"

Holding that requests for injunctive relief are remedies and are dismissed with the underlying claim

In Anti-Monopoly, Inc. v. Hasbro, Inc., supra, 958 F.Supp. 895, 904, the plaintiff did submit the declaration and cross-elasticity reports of an expert economist "to satisfy its burden relating to market definition."

Holding that, while courts may invalidate underlying copyrights, the Copyright Act gives federal courts no authority to cancel copyright registrations with the U.S. Copyright Office

Finding that identity was sufficiently alleged to grant default judgment in a BitTorrent copyright case where Plaintiff identified “Defendant's online activities, hobbies, and interest implicate he was the infringer, and not his wife.”

Holding that the plaintiff abandoned six claims when her brief failed to respond to the defendants' arguments on those claims

Holding that a District Court "should consider not whether the losing party can afford to pay the fees but whether the imposition of fees will further the goals of the Copyright Act."

In Weinstein, the plaintiff brought a breach of contract action and argued that an email exchange between it and the defendant copyright co-owner codified a prior oral agreement to transfer exclusive distribution rights and satisfied § 204(a).

Holding that plaintiff's legal theories concerning its standing to pursue a copyright infringement claim are objectively unreasonable because the plaintiff was notice that the courts had already determined that plaintiff did not have standing to assert a claim under the Copyright Act

Holding party seeking fees may additionally seek "nontaxable expenses"

Recognizing court's ability to enter emergency order with less than full adversary hearing and even, in appropriate circumstances, without notice

Granting the district court discretion to award attorney's fees to the prevailing party in copyright cases