No. 18-701

Clayton Prince Tanksley v. Lee Daniels, et al.

Lower Court: Third Circuit
Docketed: 2018-11-29
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Relisted (2)
Tags: 7th-amendment access amendment copyright copyright-infringement jury-trial lay-observer-test pleading-stage prima-facie-claim probative-similarity similarity substantial-similarity
Key Terms:
DueProcess Copyright
Latest Conference: 2019-04-12 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the trial court should engage in a substantive analysis and determination regarding substantial similarity as a matter of law at the pleading stage

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

question presented is whether the trial court should engage in a substantive analysis and determination regarding substantial similarity as a matter of law at the pleading stage of the proceedings, without discovery, cross examination of witnesses, and expert testimony, where, as in the case sub judice, the Petitioner has stated a valid prima facie cause of action, has an admittedly valid copyright, has demonstrated (with uncontested) access and probative similarity, and has alleged facts that satisfy the lay-observer test? (2) | Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the District Court’s grant of Respondents’ Motions to Dismiss, even though Petitioner had stated a valid prima facie cause of action for direct copyright infringement, thereby depriving Petitioner of his right to a jury trial as guaranteed by the 7" Amendment of the United States Constitution? (3) | Whether Petitioner should have been permitted to amend his Second Amended Complaint?

Docket Entries

2019-04-15
Rehearing DENIED.
2019-03-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2019.
2019-03-18
2019-02-19
Petition DENIED.
2019-01-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2018-11-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 31, 2018)

Attorneys

Clayton Prince Tanksley
Mary Elizabeth BoganBOGAN LAW GROUP, LLC, Petitioner