Jesse Graham v. Taylor Swift

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 25, 202221-55419California265 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

FEB 25 2022

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JESSE GRAHAM, No. 21-55419

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:20-cv-07000-MWF-GJS

v.

MEMORANDUM*

TAYLOR SWIFT, an individual; BIG MACHINE LABEL GROUP LLC, a limited liability company; UNIVERSAL MUSIC GROUP, INC., a California Corporation;

KOBALT MUSIC PUBLISHING

AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Michael W. Fitzgerald, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 15, 2022**

Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Jesse Graham appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his

copyright action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). In his opening brief, Graham…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.