Moffat, Marilyn et al v. Academy of Geriatric Physical Therapy

Filing 101

Transmission of Notice of Appeal, Docketing Statement, Opinion and Order, Judgment and Docket Sheet to Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals re: 99 Notice of Appeal, (Attachments: # 1 Docketing Statement, # 2 Opinion and Order, # 3 Judgment, # 4 Docket Sheet) (lak)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

MARILYN MOFFAT, KAREN KEMMIS,
DANILLE PARKER and MARK RICHARDS,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No. 15-cv-626-JDP

ACADEMY OF GERIATRIC PHYSICAL
THERAPY,
Defendant.

SEVENTH CIRCUIT RULE 3(c)(1) DOCKETING STATEMENT
OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS MARILYN MOFFAT, KAREN KEMMIS,
DANILLE PARKER and MARK RICHARDS

Plaintiffs, Marilyn Moffat, Karen Kemmis, Danille Parker, and Mark Richards, in the
above named case, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby submit this Docketing Statement
pursuant to Circuit Rule 3(c)(1) of United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and
states as follows:
I.

DISTRICT COURT JURISDICTION
The United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin (“District Court”)

had original jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338, as the
claims presented a federal question under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. Plaintiffs
are four individuals; Defendant is the Academy of Geriatric Physical Therapy (“AOGPT”), an
individual membership professional organization representing physical therapists who specialize

in treating geriatric adults. The AOGPT has its principal place of business in the Western
District of Wisconsin.
II.

APPELLATE COURT JURISDICTION
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has jurisdiction over

Plaintiffs’ appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The final Judgment was entered by the District
Court on January 27, 2017, wherein summary judgment was entered in favor of defendant
Academy of Geriatric Physical Therapy and against plaintiffs Marilyn Moffat, Karen Kemmis,
Danielle Parker, and Mark Richards dismissing plaintiffs’ copyright infringement claims.
(Dkt. No. 90). Plaintiffs’ Notice of Appeal was timely filed with the District Court on
February 27, 2017.
III.

THIS IS AN APPEAL OF AN IMMEDIATELY APPEALABLE FINAL
JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs appeal from the Judgment entered on January 27, 2017 (Dkt. No. 90), and the

underlying Opinion and Order dated December 22, 2016 (Dkt. No. 61), granting Defendant’s
motion for summary judgment and dismissing Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendant. This is an
appeal from a final judgment.
IV.

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF CIRCUIT RULE 3(c)(1)
This is a civil case that does not involve any criminal convictions. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) is

inapplicable. None of the parties to the litigation appear in an official capacity. This case does
not involve a collateral attack on a criminal conviction. There have been no prior or related
appellate proceedings in this case.

2

Respectfully Submitted,
Dated: February 27, 2017

s/ James E. Griffith
James E. Griffith – Counsel of Record
(6269854)
Tiffany D. Gehrke (6299836)
Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP
233 S. Wacker Dr, Suite 6300
Chicago, IL 60606
(phone) 312-474-6300
(fax) 312-474-0448
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
John Sachs
180 Central Park South
Suite 1237
New York, New York 10019
[phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

3