Shloss v. Sweeney et al

Filing 60

*** FILED IN ERROR. PLEASE SEE DOCKETS # 62 and # 64 . *** MOTION to Related Case Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related filed by Carol Loeb Shloss. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Granting motion)(McLaughlin, Dorothy) (Filed on 2/14/2007) Modified on 2/16/2007 (ewn, COURT STAFF).

Shloss v. Sweeney et al

Doc. 60

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 60

Filed 02/14/2007

Page 1 of 4

1 KEKER& VANNEST, LLP
2 MATTHEW M. WERDEGAR - #200470 DOROTHY R. McLAUGHLIN - #229453

MA A. LEMLEY - #155830

3 BENEDICT Y. HU - #224018
710 Sansome Street
4 San Francisco, CA 94111-1704

Telephone: [phone]
5 Facsimile: [phone]
6 (Additional Counsel

listed on signature page)

7 Attorneys for Plaintiff
CAROL LOEB SCHLOSS
8

9 10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN
SAN JOSE DIVISION

12

13 CAROL LOEB SCHLOSS,
14
15

Case No. CV 06-3718 (JW) (HR)
Plaintiff,

v.

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED
Judge: The Honorable James Ware
Date Compo Filed: Januar 25,2007

16 SEÁN SWEENEY, in his capacity as trustee
ofthe Estate of James Joyce, and THE 17 ESTATE OF JAMES JOYCE,

18 Defendant.
19 and

22 V.

21 Plaintiff,
20 CAROL LOEB SCHLOSS,
.

24 The Estate of James Joyce,
25

23 STEPHEN JAMES JOYCE, in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a Trustee of
Defendant.

26 27 28

389925.01

ADMINSTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED CASE NO. CV 06-3718 (JW) (HR) Dockets.Justia.com

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 60

Filed 02/14/2007

Page 2 of 4

1 Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 3-12 and 7-11, Plaintiff

Professor Carol Loeb Shloss

2 C'Shloss"), by and through her attorneys, fies this administrative motion to consider whether the

3 above-captioned cases should be related.
4 On June 12,2006, Plaintiff filed the first of

the above-captioned suits against Defendants

5 the Estate of James Joyce (the "Estate"), and Sean Sweeny, in his capacity as trstee ofthe

6 Estate. Plaintiffs complaint seeks a declaratory judgment that her use on her academic website

7 of certain quotes from the writings of James Joyce and other Joyce family members, to which the

8 Estate purports to own copyrghts, is permissible fair use. Plaintiff s complaint also requests that
9 the Court declare that the 1922 Pars edition of Ulysses

is in the public domain, and that

10 Defendants should be bared from enforcing their copyrghts against Plaintiff due to their acts of
11 copyrght misuse and unclean hands.

12 In their November 17,2006 motion to dismiss, which was denied on February 9,2006,

13 Defendants asserted that Stephen James Joyce is the sole owner ofthe copyrights in the works of
14 James Joyce's daughter, Lucia Joyce. See November 17,2006 Motion to Dismiss, at 5 (Docket
15 No. 21) and Declaration of Sean Sweeney in Support of

Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, ir 3

16 (Docket No. 23) (setting forth, without more, Sweeney's "understanding" that Stephen Joyce

17 owns the copyrghts to Lucia Joyce's wrtings). Plaintiffs website contains a number of quotes
18 19

from Lucia Joyce's writings.
Accordingly, on January25, 2007, Plaintiff

filed the second ofthe above-captioned suits

20
21

against Defendant Stephen James Joyce. Plaintiffs suit against Stephen Joyce seeks a
declaratory judgment that her use on her academic website of certain quotes from the wrtings of
Lucia Joyce, to which Stephen Joyce claims to own the copyrght, is permissible fair use.

22
23

Plaintiffs complaint against Stephen Joyce also requests that the Cour declare that the 1922
Pars edition of Ulysses

24
25

is in the public domain, and that Defendant should be bared from

enforcing his copyrghts against Plaintiff due to his acts of copyrght misuse and unclean hands.
Stephen Joyce is not a named pary in the first-captioned case above, but he is an agent
and trstee of one of

26
27
28

the paries, the Estate of James Joyce. Assuming that it is tre that Stephen

Joyce owns 100% ofthe rights in Lucia Joyce's copyrghts, those copyrghts wil only be at issue
1

389925.01

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED CASE NO. CV 06-3718 (JW) (HR)

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 60

Filed 02/14/2007

Page 3 of 4

1 in the second ofthe above-captioned suits.

2 Nevertheless, because Plaintiffs website uses both writings from James Joyce and from

3 Lucia Joyce; because Defendant Stephen James Joyce is also a trstee ofthe Estate of James
4 Joyce, and has, at times relevant to the above cases, acted on behalf of

both the Estate and

5 himself

in asserting rights in the copyrghts of James and Lucia Joyce; and therefore, because

6 there is likely to be overlapping discovery and other issues between the two cases, the
7 requirements of

Civil Local Rule 3-12(a) seem to be met such that the two cases should be

8 related.
9 On Januar 29,2007 counsel for Plaintiff sent a couresy copy ofthe Complaint in the
10 second-filed case to Mara Nelson, counsel for defendants in the first-filed case. Plaintiffs

11 counsel asked whether Stephen Joyce, who, upon information and belief, has been active in
12 directing the litigation in the first-filed case, would consent to waive service of

the Complaint in

13 the second-filed case. Ms. Nelson stated that she would take the request under consideration. To

14 date Ms. Nelson has not agreed to waive or accept service on behalf of Stephen Joyce.

15 Accordingly, the Cour should know that Mr. Joyce has not yet been served.
16 17
18

19

20
21

22
23
24"

25

26

27
28
2
389925.01

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED
CASE NO. CV 06-3718 (JW (HR)

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 60

Filed 02/14/2007

Page 4 of 4

1 Dated: February 14, 2007

KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP

2
3

By: Isl DOROTHY RMcLAUGHLIN
4
5

MA A. LEMLEY
MATTHEW M. WERDEGAR

6 7
8

DOROTHY R McLAUGHLIN BENEDICT y. HU
Lawrence Lessig Anthony T. Falzone (SBN 190845) David S. Olson (SBN 231675)

STANORD LAW SCHOOL CENTER FOR INTERNT AN SOCffTY
595 Nathan Abbott Way Stanford, California 94305-8610
Telephone: [phone]

9

10
11

Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: falzone~stanford.edu

12
13

Bernard A. Burk (SBN 118083)
Robert Spoo (pro hac vice)

HOWAR RICE NEMEROVSKI CANADY FALK & RAKI, P.C.
Three Embarcadero Center, 7th Floor

14
15

San Francisco, California 94111-4024
Telephone: [phone]
16 17
18

Facsimile: [phone] Email: bburk~howardrice.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff CAROL LOEB SCHLOSS

19

20
21

22
23

24
25

26
27
28
3 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED CASE NO. CV 06-3718 (JW) (HR)

389925.01