Jake Mandeville-Anthony v. The Walt Disney Company

MEMORANDUM

Jake Mandeville-Anthony appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment on the pleadings in his action alleging claims for copyright infringement and breach of im plied contract. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Fleming v. Pickard, 581 F.3d 922, 925 (9th Cir.2009), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted judgment on Mandeville-Anthony’s copyright infringement claims because there was no substantial similarity between protected elements of his copyrighted works and comparable elements of the defendants’ works as a matter of law, and any similarity in the general concepts of car racing and anthropomorphic cars is unprotected. See Benay v. Warner Bros. Entm’t, Inc., 607 F.3d 620, 624 (9th Cir.2010) (setting forth extrinsic test to assess substantial similarity between specific expressive elements of copyrighted works at issue as a matter of law, such as plot, sequence of events, theme, dialogue, mood, setting, pace, and characters); Funky Films, Inc. v. Time Warner Entm’t Co., L.P., 462 F.3d 1072, 1077 (9th Cir.2006) (substantial similarity focuses on only concrete, protectable elements of works standing alone, not…