Zuma Press, Inc. v. Getty Images (US), Inc.
Plaintiff: Zuma Press, Inc.
Defendant: Getty Images (US), Inc.
Case Number: 1:2016cv06110
Filed: August 1, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: XX Out of State
Presiding Judge: Alvin K. Hellerstein
Nature of Suit: Copyrights
Cause of Action: 17 U.S.C. ยง 101
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 1, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 268 ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT re: (192 in 1:16-cv-06110-AKH) MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment; (257 in 1:16-cv-06110-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment: For the reasons stated, Defendant's mot ion for summary judgment is granted and Plaintiffs' partial motion for summary judgment is denied. The Clerk shall enter judgment for Defendant, with costs to be taxed by the Clerk. The Clerk shall close the open motions (ECF Nos. 192 and 257) a nd mark the case closed. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 7/1/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:16-cv-06110-AKH, 1:17-cv-05832-AKH(jwh) Transmission to Finance Unit (Cashiers) for processing. Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
January 24, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 189 ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION re: (175 in 1:16-cv-06110-AKH) MOTION for Attorney Fees and Costs filed by Getty Images (US), Inc., (180 in 1:16-cv-06110-AKH, 180 in 1: 16-cv-06110-AKH, 180 in 1:16-cv-06110-AKH) MOTION for Reconsideration re; (172) Memorandum & Opinion(173) Clerk's Judgment MOTION for Reargument re: (172) Memorandum & Opinion (173) Clerk's Judgment . MOTI ON to Vacate (173) Clerk's Judgment filed by Manny Flores, Christopher Szagola, Anthony Barham, Duncan Williams, Tiyu (Beijing) Culture Media Co. Ltd., John Middlebrook, Zuma Press, Inc., Charles Baus, Action Sports Photo graphy, Inc., Robert Backman, Andrew Dieb, Louis Lopez. For the reasons stated above, Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 180) is granted in part and denied in part. As to Plaintiffs' copyright infringement claim, the motion for reconsideration is granted, and the Second Amended Complaint is reinstated as to that claim. As to Plaintiffs' DMCA claim, the motion for reconsideration is denied. Getty's motion for attorney's fees (ECF No. 175) is denied as p remature. The parties shall appear for a status conference on February 22, 2019 at 10:00 A.M. The Clerk shall mark ECF Nos. 175 and 180 terminated. SO ORDERED. (Status Conference set for 2/22/2019 at 10:00 AM before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein.) (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 1/24/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:16-cv-06110-AKH, 1:17-cv-05832-AKH(ne)
October 4, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 172 ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO DEFENDANT re: (72 in 1:16-cv-06110-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Manny Flores, Christopher Szagola, Anthony Barham, Duncan Williams, Tiyu (Beijing) Culture Media Co. Ltd., John Middlebrook, Zuma Press, Inc., Charles Baus, Action Sports Photography, Inc., Robert Backman, Andrew Dieb, Louis Lopez, (78 in 1:16-cv-06110-AKH) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Getty Images (US), Inc. For the reason s stated above, I deny plaintiffs' motion and grant defendant's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the Second Amended Complaint in 16 Civ. 6110, Dkt. No. 36, and the Complaint in 17 Civ. 5832, Dkt. No. 1. The Clerk shall enter judgme nt for defendant, dismissing the two actions against it, with costs to be taxed by the Clerk. The Clerk shall terminate the motions (Dkt. Nos. 72, 78), and mark the case closed. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 10/4/2018) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:16-cv-06110-AKH, 1:17-cv-05832-AKH(ne) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
June 29, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 33 OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT: re: 25 MOTION to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint filed by Getty Images (US), Inc. For the reasons stated herein, Gett y's motion to dismiss plaintiff's first amended complaint is granted in part and denied in part. The Clerk shall terminate the motion (Dkt. No. 25). The oral argument scheduled for July 6, 2017 is canceled. Plaintiffs shall filed a second a mended complaint by July 21, 2017. Defendant shall answer by August 4, 2017. An initial conference shall be held on August 18, 2017 at 10 a.m., at which the parties shall propose a case management plan in accordance with my individual rules. SO ORDERED,., ( Amended Pleadings due by 7/21/2017., Initial Conference set for 8/18/2017 at 10:00 AM before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein.) (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 6/29/2017) (ama)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Zuma Press, Inc. v. Getty Images (US), Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Zuma Press, Inc.
Represented By: Richard Liebowitz
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Getty Images (US), Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?