Liberty Media Holdings LLC v. Vinigay.com et al

Filing 43

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER approving, incorporating and adopting the 42 Report and Recommendations: IT IS FURTHER ORDERED GRANTING in part and DENYING in part Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment. (Doc. 24.) The Court grants Plaint iff's Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant Gustavo Paladeski. The Court denies Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment against the remaining Defendants. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall enter Judgment in favor of Plaintif f Liberty Media Holdings, LLC and against Defendant Gustavo Paladeski in the amount of $1,006,380.90 ($990,440.40 + $15,940.50 for attorneys fees, costs and travel expenses). The Judgment shall earn interest at the annual federal rate from the date of entry of thisJudgment until paid in full. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED ENTERING a permanent injunction in favor of Plaintiff Liberty Media Holdings, LLC against Defendant Gustavo Paladeski, his agents, representatives, servants, employees, attorneys, successors and assigns, and all others acting in concert or participation with him, enjoining and restraining them from copying, postingor making any other infringing use or infringing distribution of Plaintiff's audiovisual works, ph otographs or other materials. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED ENTERING an order of impoundment pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §§ 503 and 509(a), impounding all infringing copies of Plaintiffs copyrighted works, that are in Defendant Paladeski's possessio n or under his control until the judgment entered herein is paid in full. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING Plaintiff's request for an order impounding Defendants domain name (vinigay.com), and DENYING an award of pre-judgment interest. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE the remaining claims alleged in the Amended Complaint, Causes of Action Two, Three and Four. (See document for further details). Signed by Judge Stephen M McNamee on 2/27/12. (LAD)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Liberty Media Holdings, LLC, 10 Plaintiff, 11 vs. 12 Vinigay.com; Gustavo Paladeski; Vinicius Alves, 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-11-280-PHX-SMM (LOA) MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint alleging direct copyright infringement, contributory copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement and inducement of copyright infringement. (Doc. 6.) This matter was assigned and litigated before Magistrate Judge Lawrence O. Anderson. (Doc. 9.) On December 28, 2011, Magistrate Judge Anderson filed a Report and Recommendation with this Court. (Doc. 42.) To date, no objections have been filed. STANDARD OF REVIEW When reviewing a Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, this Court must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made,” and “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983)). Failure to object to a Magistrate Judge’s recommendation relieves the Court of conducting de novo review of the Magistrate Judge’s 1 factual findings; the Court then may decide the dispositive motion on the applicable law. 2 Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979) (citing Campbell v. United States 3 Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196 (9th Cir. 1974)). 4 By failing to object to a Report and Recommendation, a party waives its right to 5 challenge the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings, but not necessarily the Magistrate Judge’s 6 legal conclusions. Baxter, 923 F.2d at 1394; see also Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 7 (9th Cir. 1998) (failure to object to a Magistrate Judge’s legal conclusion “is a factor to be 8 weighed in considering the propriety of finding waiver of an issue on appeal”); Martinez v. 9 Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing McCall v. Andrus, 628 F.2d 1185, 1187 10 (9th Cir. 1980)). DISCUSSION 11 12 Having reviewed the legal conclusions of the Report and Recommendation of the 13 Magistrate Judge, and no objections having been made by Defendants thereto, the Court 14 hereby incorporates and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. CONCLUSION 15 16 For the reasons set forth, 17 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED approving, incorporating, and adopting the Report and 18 Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Lawrence O. Anderson. (Doc. 42.) 19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED GRANTING in part and DENYING in part 20 Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment. (Doc. 24.) The Court grants Plaintiff’s Motion for 21 Default Judgment against Defendant Gustavo Paladeski. The Court denies Plaintiff’s Motion 22 for Default Judgment against the remaining Defendants. 23 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall enter Judgment in favor of Plaintiff 24 Liberty Media Holdings, LLC and against Defendant Gustavo Paladeski in the amount of 25 $1,006,380.90 ($990,440.40 + $15,940.50 for attorney’s fees, costs and travel expenses). 26 The Judgment shall earn interest at the annual federal rate from the date of entry of this 27 Judgment until paid in full. 28 -2- 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED ENTERING a permanent injunction in favor of 2 Plaintiff Liberty Media Holdings, LLC against Defendant Gustavo Paladeski, his agents, 3 representatives, servants, employees, attorneys, successors and assigns, and all others acting 4 in concert or participation with him, enjoining and restraining them from copying, posting 5 or making any other infringing use or infringing distribution of Plaintiff’s audiovisual works, 6 photographs or other materials. 7 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED ENTERING an order of impoundment pursuant to 17 8 U.S.C. §§ 503 and 509(a), impounding all infringing copies of Plaintiff’s copyrighted works, 9 that are in Defendant Paladeski’s possession or under his control until the judgment entered 10 herein is paid in full. 11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING Plaintiff’s request for an order impounding 12 Defendants’ domain name (vinigay.com), and DENYING an award of pre-judgment interest. 13 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE the remaining 14 15 claims alleged in the Amended Complaint, Causes of Action Two, Three and Four. DATED this 27th day of February, 2012. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?