Cambridge University Press, et al v. J.L. Albert, et al

Filing 45

MOTION to file amicus brief pursuant to FRAP 29(a) filed by Daniel Tenny for United States. [6776447-1] (ECF: Daniel Tenny)

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.

Nos. 12-14676,
12-15147

MARK P. BECKER, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.

MOTION BY UNITED STATES TO EXTEND TIME
IN WHICH TO FILE AMICUS BRIEF
SCOTT R. McINTOSH
DANIEL TENNY
[phone]
Attorneys, Appellate Staff
Civil Division
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Room 7215
Washington, D.C. 20530

Cambridge University Press v. Becker, Nos. 12-14676, 12-15147
CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS AND
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Pursuant to 11th Cir. Rule 26.1, counsel for the United States of
America certify that the following have an interest in the outcome of this
appeal:
Albert, J.L.
Alford, C. Dean
Askew, Anthony B.
Association of American Publishers
Ballard Spahr, LLP
Banks, W. Wright, Jr.
Bates, Mary Katherine
Becker, Mark P.
Bernard, Kenneth R., Jr.
Bishop, James A.
Bloom, Jonathan
Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia
C-1 of 5

Cambridge University Press v. Becker, Nos. 12-14676, 12-15147
Bondurant, Mixson & Elmore, LLP
Cambridge University Press
Carter, Hugh A., Jr.
Cleveland, William H.
Cooper, Frederick E.
Copyright Clearance Center
Ellis, Larry R.
Evans, Hon. Orinda D.
Gentry, Robin L.
Georgia State University
Griffin, Rutledge A., Jr.
Harbin, John Weldon
Hatcher, Robert F.
Henry, Ronald
Hopkins, C. Thomas, Jr.
Hurt, Charlene

C-2 of 5

Cambridge University Press v. Becker, Nos. 12-14676, 12-15147
Jennings, W. Mansfield, Jr.
Jolly, James R.
King & Spalding, LLP
Krugman, Edward B.
Larson, Todd D.
Leebern, Donald M., Jr.
Lerer, R.O.
Levie, Walter Hill, III
Lynn, Kristen A.
McIntosh, Scott R.
McKeon Meunier Carlin & Curfman, LLC
McMillan, Eldridge
Miller, Richard William
Moffit, Natasha Horne
NeSmith, William, Jr.
Olens, Samuel S.

C-3 of 5

Cambridge University Press v. Becker, Nos. 12-14676, 12-15147
Oxford University Press USA
Oxford University Press, Inc.
Oxford University Press, LLC
Palm, Risa
Patton, Carl V.
Poitevint, Doreen Stiles
Potts, Willis J., Jr.
Pruitt, Neil L., Jr.
Quicker, Katrina M.
Rains, John H., IV
Rich, R. Bruce
Rodwell, Wanda Yancey
SAGE Publications, Inc.
Schaetzel, Stephen M.
Seamans, Nancy
Singer, Randi W

C-4 of 5

Cambridge University Press v. Becker, Nos. 12-14676, 12-15147
State of Georgia
Stelling, Kessel, Jr.
Tarbutton, Benjamin J., III
Tenny, Daniel
The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford
Tucker, Richard L.
Vigil, Allan
Volkert, Mary Josephine Leddy
Walker, Larry
Weil Gotshal & Manges, LLP
Whiting-Pack, Denise E.
Wilheit, Philip A., Sr

C-5 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.

Nos. 12-14676,
12-15147

MARK P. BECKER, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.

MOTION BY UNITED STATES TO EXTEND TIME
IN WHICH TO FILE AMICUS BRIEF
The United States respectfully moves for a 21-day extension of time,
to and including February 25, 2013, in which to file any amicus brief in
support of appellants or in support of neither party. This request is
contingent on the Court’s granting the parties’ joint motion for an
extension of the appellees’ briefing time. Plaintiffs-appellants consent to
this motion, but defendants-appellees do not consent.
1. This is an action under the Copyright Act by the publishers of
copyrighted works that were excerpted and distributed as course materials
at Georgia State University. The principal issue in the case is whether the

university committed copyright infringement by reproducing and
disseminating those course materials to students through an electronic
distribution system without the permission of the copyright owners. The
plaintiffs are publishers of the works, and the defendants are university
officials sued in their official capacities.
In a 350-page opinion, the district court adjudicated the copyright
claims with regard to 74 excerpts that were placed on the electronic
distribution system. The court concluded that the plaintiffs had proven
their copyright infringement case as to five of those works, and the
defendants prevailed on the others. The court issued an injunction
requiring the defendants to conform their policies to the analysis set forth
in the court’s opinion, and awarded attorney’s fees and costs to the
defendants. Plaintiffs appeal.
2. The government is currently evaluating whether to participate in
this appeal as amicus curiae. The appellants’ opening brief is due January
28, 2013. An amicus brief in support of appellants, or in support of neither
party, would be due on February 4, 2013. Fed. R. App. P. 29(e).
2

Any amicus participation would need to be authorized by the
Solicitor General, see 28 C.F.R. § 0.20(c), after consultation with all
interested agencies within the government. That consultation and review
process has not yet concluded, and the government requests additional
time to consider the issues presented in this case.
On January 18, 2013, the parties filed a joint motion to extend the
deadline for the appellees’ brief by 45 days, to April 21, 2013. If the joint
motion is granted, the United States respectfully requests an extension of
21 days, to and including February 25, 2013, to file any amicus brief in
support of appellants or in support of neither party. If the Court grants an
extension, but the Solicitor General determines that the United States will
not file an amicus brief, or that the United States will file an amicus brief in
support of appellees, we will notify the Court and the parties no later than
February 25.
This extension will afford the government additional time to consider
this case without jeopardizing the briefing schedule applicable to the
parties. If the Court grants the joint motion for an extension of appellees’
3

briefing time, appellees would have ample time, in advance of the deadline
for filing their brief, to consider the points made in any amicus brief filed by
February 25, 2013.
3. Counsel for plaintiffs-appellants have authorized us to state that
they do not oppose this motion. Counsel for defendants-appellees have
informed us that they do not consent to this motion, and have not yet
decided whether they will file a written opposition.
Respectfully submitted,
SCOTT R. McINTOSH
/s/ Daniel Tenny _
DANIEL TENNY
[phone]
Attorneys, Appellate Staff
Civil Division
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Room 7215
Washington, D.C. 20530
JANUARY 2013

4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on January 25, 2013, I filed and served the
foregoing motion on counsel of record through this Court’s CM/ECF
system.

/s/ Daniel Tenny
Daniel Tenny