Briggs

Briggs v. Blomkamp

Good Law
70 F. Supp. 3d 1155·2014 WL 4961396·112 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1481·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142016
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 3, 2014No. C 13-4679 PJHCalifornia11,970 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hamilton, J.

ORDER RE MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

The parties’ motions for summary judgment came on for hearing before this court on September 3, 2014. Plaintiff Steve Wilson Briggs appeared in propria persona, and defendants Neill Blomkamp, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Inc., Tristar Pictures, Inc., Media Rights Capital II, L.P., and QED International LLC appeared by their counsel Michael J. Kump and Gregory P. Korn. Having reviewed the papers and other materials submitted by the parties, and having carefully considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, the court hereby GRANTS defendants’ motion and DENIES plaintiffs motion.

BACKGROUND

A. Procedural and Factual Background

The following facts are as alleged in the first amended complaint (“FAC”). Plaintiff asserts that he completed a first draft of a screenplay entitled “Uberopolis: City of Light” in May 2005, and that he emailed copies of the screenplay to family and friends. On December 16, 2005, he registered a revised version of “Uberopolis: City of Light” with the Writers Guild of America (West).

In January 2006, plaintiff began attempting to market his screenplay. During approximately the next two years, he ' sent…

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.