Tom Bean v. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Pub. , 585 F. App'x 461 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                                 OCT 17 2014
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                          U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    TOM BEAN,                                        No. 10-16771
    Plaintiff - Appellant,             D.C. No. 3:10-cv-08034-DGC
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    HOUGHTON MIFFLIN HARCOURT
    PUBLISHING COMPANY,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Arizona
    David G. Campbell, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted October 10, 2014**
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    Tom Bean appeals from the dismissal of his copyright infringement action
    against Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. The district court held that Bean had not met
    17 U.S.C. § 411(a)’s pre-suit copyright registration requirement because his
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    -2-
    photographs were improperly registered under 17 U.S.C. § 409. We have
    jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, Cosmetic Ideas, Inc. v.
    IAC/Interactivecorp, 
    606 F.3d 612
    , 614 (9th Cir. 2010), and we VACATE the
    dismissal order and REMAND for further proceedings.
    We recently held in a similar case, Alaska Stock, LLC v. Houghton Mifflin
    Harcourt Publishing Company, that the registration of a compilation of
    photographs also registers the individual photographs within the compilation
    where, as here, the registrant follows Copyright Office practice and does not
    include the title and author of each individual photograph on the registration
    application. 
    747 F.3d 673
    , 685 (9th Cir. 2014). Consistent with our Alaska Stock
    opinion’s express disagreement with the district court’s decision in this case, 
    id. at 684
    n.50, we hold that the district court erred in dismissing Bean’s action under
    Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) on the ground that his photographs were
    not individually registered.
    VACATED and REMANDED.
    Costs awarded to Appellant.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-16771

Citation Numbers: 585 F. App'x 461

Filed Date: 10/17/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023