Market Masters-Legal, A Resonance Company, Inc. v. Parker Waichman Alonso LLP

Filing 123

Judge Michael A. Ponsor: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS IN LIMINE entered. As follows: Defendants Motion In Limine Regarding Alleged Infringement of Discrete Elements (Dkt. No. 98 ). This motion is hereby ALLOWED, in part. Defendants Motion In Limine Regarding Standing (Dkt. No. 101 ) and Plaintiffs Motion In Limine to Preclude Defenses (Dkt. No. 105 ). The filing of these two motions in limine has sharpened the courts focus on whether Plaintiff possesses sufficient rights in the alle gedly copyrighted material to allow it to pursue this action. The legal chain connecting Plaintiff to the two Big Case commercials appears tenuous. Based on this, the court has directed the clerk to set up a hearing on this issue at 10:00 a.m. on Feb ruary 17, 2012. Plaintiff should come to this hearing with the documentary material sufficient, if accepted by the jury, to provide standing to Plaintiff to pursue this copyright action. See the attached memo and order for complete details. (Lindsay, Maurice)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
MARKET MASTERS-LEGAL,
A RESONANCE COMPANY, INC.,
Plaintiff
v.
PARKER WAICHMAN ALONSO, LLP.,
Defendant

)
)
)
)
) C.A. 10-cv-40119-MAP
)
)
)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING
MOTIONS IN LIMINE
(Dkt. Nos. 98, 101 & 105)
February 16, 2012
PONSOR, U.S.D.J.
Trial in this matter is scheduled to commence on Tuesday,
February 21, 2012.

The court has recently ruled on a number

of motions in limine.

Three motions remain for ruling, of

which two will require further argument.
A.

Defendant’s

Motion

In

Limine

Regarding

Alleged

Infringement of Discrete Elements (Dkt. No. 98).
This motion is hereby ALLOWED, in part.

Plaintiff may

seek an award of damages solely on its claim for copyright
violation as to its 15-second and 30-second versions of its
“Big Case” commercial.

Both as a matter of law, and based on

its failure to provide discovery, Plaintiff may pursue no
independent claim for damages as to short phrases, non-verbal

elements, and the like. 1
Plaintiff will not be permitted to seek multiple damage
awards for multiple displays of a single infringing product.
The issue of willfulness will be for the jury.
B. Defendant’s Motion In Limine Regarding Standing (Dkt.
No. 101) and Plaintiff’s Motion In Limine to Preclude Defenses
(Dkt. No. 105).
The filing of these two motions in limine has sharpened
the court’s focus on whether Plaintiff possesses sufficient
rights in the allegedly copyrighted material to allow it to
pursue this action.

The legal chain connecting Plaintiff to

the two “Big Case” commercials appears tenuous.

Based on

this, the court has directed the clerk to set up a hearing on
this issue at 10:00 a.m. on February 17, 2012.

Plaintiff

should come to this hearing with the documentary material
sufficient, if accepted by the jury, to provide standing to
Plaintiff to pursue this copyright action.
It is So Ordered.
/s/ Michael A. Ponsor
MICHAEL A. PONSOR
United States District Judge

1

Defendant in its written submissions has suggested that
Plaintiff has voluntarily abandoned any claim of copyright
infringement as to the 15-second commercial.
This may be
clarified at oral argument.
2