Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1

Document technical information

Format pdf
Size 1,0 MB
First found ноя 13, 2015

Document content analysis

Category Also themed
Language
English
Type
not defined
Concepts
no text concepts found

Persons

Howard Kaylan
Howard Kaylan

wikipedia, lookup

Mark Volman
Mark Volman

wikipedia, lookup

John S. Cohen
John S. Cohen

wikipedia, lookup

Organizations

Places

Transcript

Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 1 of 23 Page ID #:14
~
~
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 2 of 23 Page ID #:15
nI
GRADSTEIN & MARZANO, P.C.
HENRY GRADSTEIN (State Bar No. 89747)
2 haradstein uiastein.cam
F I L ED
MARYANN. R.: MARZANO (State Bar No. 96867)
3
Los Angeles Superfar;court
mmarzanof(dstcin com
.
ROBERT E. 'ALLEN (State'BarNo. 166589)
4 ralleii r gradstein s
6,310 San Vicerite . Blvd., Suite 510
5c Los Angeles, California 90048
Ob
T: 323776-3100 - F: 323931-4990.
AUG 0 1 ' ~~
Jahn A.
, FWcerIGler4t
EV AN , S. COHEN ( State Bar No . 119601 )
7 csc n -Hans f' 'to.eom
• 1 180 South Beverly Drive, Suite 510
8 Los Angeles , `California 90035
9.
T: 310-556-9860: F: 310-556-9801
Attorneys for'Plaintif
-~
10
FLO'&EDDIE,
INC.
-~
a m'p
12
'
SUPERIOR COURT OF'THE- STATE OF CAE IF'ORN1A
`" .. 13
FO1 THE COUNTY-OF LOS ANGELES, CENTRAL -DISTRICT' .
14 FLO' & EDDIE INC., a California ,
Case No.
corporation individually and on behalf of all
1•5: .others similarly situated,
CLASS- ACTION
16
COMPLAINT FOR:
,
Plaintiff,
17Q
v.
1. MISAPPROPRIATION
(Cal Clio. Code '§ 980(a)(2 ) enid Common
Law];
2. UNFAIR COMPETITION
[Cal Bus. & Piro#. Code § 17200 and
Common Law]; AND
3. CONVERSION
18 STRIPS : M RADIO, 'INC., a Delaware
corpiration; and DOES I through 100,
19
Defendants.
20
21
•
DEMAND FOR Jli1R
YJRIAL
„
24
-r
25•
G7
9
µ
`W
►
27
dog
}
L
'CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Q
3
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 3 of 23 Page ID #:16
Plaintiff FLO & EDDIE, INC. ("Plaintiff` or "Flo & Eddie") files this class action
21 Complaint on behalf of itself and on behalf of all other similarly situated owners of sound
recordings of musical performances that initially were "fixed" (€.e., recorded) prior to February 15,
4
1972 (the "Pre -1972 Recordings") against Defendants SIRIUS XM RADIO, INC. ("Defendant" or
5 "SiriusXM") and DOES 1-100, and alleges as follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
6
California Civil Code Section 980 (a)(2) provides that "[t]he author of an original
7
work of authorship consisting of a sound recording initially fixed prior to February 15, 1972, has
9 an exclusive ownership therein until February 15, 2047, as against all persons except one who
V A
1t;
W
tZ
R
10
independently makes or duplicates another sound recording that does not directly or indirectly
11
recapture the actual sounds fixed in such prior sound recording, but consists entirely of an
12
independent fixation of other sounds, even though such sounds imitate or simulate the sounds
13
contained in the prior sound recording." The unauthorized duplication and exploitation of Pre-
14
1972 Recordings in California constitutes misappropriation, unfair competition and conversion.
151
cam
2.
The principals of Flo & Eddie, Mark Volman and Howard Kaylan, have been
16 performing together as The Turtles since 1965 and have recorded numerous iconic hits including
171 "Happy Together," "It Ain't Me Babe," "She'd Rather Be With Me," "You Baby," "She's My
18. Girl," "Elenore," and many others. Since approximately 1971, Flo & Eddie has owned the entire
19 catalog of 100 original master recordings by The Turtles, all of which were recorded prior to
February 15, 1972. Notwithstanding the absence of any license or authorization from Plaintiff,
21
The Turtles recordings can be heard every hour of every day by subscribers in California to the
22
satellite and Internet services owned by Defendant known as "Sirius Satellite Radio," "XM
23
Satellite Radio" and "SiriusXM Satellite Radio" (individually and collectively, the "Service").
24
Plaintiff Flo & Eddie brings this class action on its own behalf and on behalf of all other similarly
25 situated owners of Pre- 1972 Recordings (the "Class" or "Class Members") to put an end to
26 SiriusXM's wholesale misappropriation of their Pre-1972 Recordings and to obtain damages,
27
28
including punitive damages.
3.
The Service is a highly profitable business which engages in the large-scale
I
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 4 of 23 Page ID #:17
distribution and public performance of sound recordings to over 24 million subscribers. The
2 1 Service is distributed in California to its subscribers through (a) satellite digital transmission
directly to subscribers via digital radios manufactured or licensed by SiriusXM; (b) satellite digital
4 transmission to subscribers of other services, such as DIRECTV Satellite Television Service and
5 Dish Network Satellite Television Service via digital set top boxes manufactured or licensed by
6
DIRECTV or Dish; and (c) the Internet, by way of (i) digital media streaming devices, such as
7
Roku, digital radios and home audio systems, such as Sonos; (ii) its website at
8 www.Siri XM.com; or (iii) computer, smart phone and other mobile applications for various
9 operating systems, including Apple iOS, Android, Windows, Blackberry and HP webOS. In
10 furtherance of the Service, SiriusXM, without any license or authority, has copied Plaintiffs and
11 each Class Members' Pre-1972 Recordings onto the Service's central server(s) and makes such
a-m
ci t=~8
12 copies available to its subscribers in California. SiriusXM publicly performs these recordings in
13 California via streaming audio transmission through the Service for a fee as part of a subscription
14 plan that currently includes up to 72 different music channels. As part of the Service, many
15 subscribers in California are also able to: (A) download the stream of a selected channel on the
m~
16 Service, allowing later or multiple listenings of the sound recordings previously streamed during
17 the selected time period; (B) download particular sound recordings, allowing later or multiple
18 listenings of such sound recordings; (C) download particular programs incorporating sound
19 recordings as part of the Service's "On Demand" feature, allowing later or multiple listenings of
20 such sound recordings; and (D) allow subscribers to pause, rewind and replay sound recordings
21 using the Service's "Replay" feature.
4.
Simply stated, SiriusXM has disregarded the Plaintiff's and other Class Members'
22
23 "exclusive ownership" of their Pre-1972 Recordings in California, impaired their ability to sell,
24 lawfully exploit, or otherwise control their Pre-1972 Recordings as permitted under California law
25 and misappropriated same for its own financial gain. SiriusXM's conduct is causing, and will
26 continue to cause, enormous and irreparable harm to Plaintiff and the other Class Members unless
n.
27 compensatory and punitive damages are awarded against SiriusXM and it is enjoined and
28, restrained from engaging in further misappropriation of the Pre-1972 Recordings,
2
CLASS ACTtON COMPLAINT
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 5 of 23 Page ID #:18
THE PARTIES, 3URISDIC]'ION AND VENUE
2
3
5.
Plaintiff Flo & Eddie is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of
California, with its principal place of business in Los Angeles, California. Plaintiff is engaged in
4 the business of distributing, selling, and/or licensing the reproduction, distribution, sale, and
5
performance of its Pre-1972 Recordings in phonorccords, in audiovisual works, and for streaming
6 (i.e., performing) and downloading over the Internet. Plaintiff invests substantial money, time,
7 effort, and creative talent in creating, advertising, promoting, selling, and licensing its unique and
8 valuable sound recordings.
9
6.
Plairitiffpossesses exclusive ownership rights in The Turtles Pre-1972 Recordings,
10 the titles of which are specified on the schedule attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated
herein by reference ("Plaintiff's Recordings"). The United States Congress expressly has
z
12 recognized that the states provide exclusive protection through various state law doctrines to
13 1 recordings "fixed" before February 15, 1972, and that the federal Copyright Act does not "annul[]
U
14 or limitJthose rights until February 15, 2067." 17 U.S.C. § 301(c). Accordingly, as quoted
15' above, California Civil Code § 980(a)(2) protects the exclusive ownership of Plaintiff and the
16 I other Class Members to their Pre-1972 Recordings in California.
I7
7.
Upon information and belief, Defendant SitiusXM is a corporation duly organized
18' and existing under the laws of Delaware, with its principal place of business in New York, New
19. York, with offices throughout California, including, without limitation, in Glendale, California
20 and Long Beach, California. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant in that Defendant
21, has multiple offices in Los Angeles County, Defendant is engaged in tortious conduct in
22 California, and Defendant's conduct causes injury to Plaintiff and the other Class Members in
23 California. Venue of this action is proper in Los Angeles County in that Defendant maintains
24 offices in Los Angeles County.
25
8.
The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise,
of defendants named herein as Does I through 100, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff who
27 11 therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names (the "Doe Defendants"). Plaintiff wilt
28 amend this Complaint to allege their true names and capacities when such have been ascertained,
3
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 6 of 23 Page ID #:19
Upon information and belief, each of the Doe Defendants herein is responsible in some manner for
2
the occurrences herein alleged , and Plaintiffs injuries and those of the other Class Members as
3
herein alleged were proximately caused by such defendants ' acts or omissions . ( All of the
4
Defendants , including the Doe Defendants , collectively are referred to as " Defendants").
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
51
9.
Plaintiff brings this action as a class action pursuant to Section 382 of the California
Code of Civil Procedure on behalf of itself and the other Class Members defined as the owners of
Pre-1972 Recordings reproduced, perforated , distributed or otherwise exploited by Defendants in
California without a license or authorization to do so during the period from August 1, 2009 to the
present . Plaintiff reserves the right to modify this definition of the Class after further discovery;
the Court may also be requested to utilize and certify subclasses in the interests of aseertainability,
Uo
manageability , justice and /or judicial economy.
10.
This action may be properly brought and maintained as a class action because there
I is a well-defined community of interest in the litigation and the Class Members are readily
ca
n a ll
~-
ascertainable from Defendant SiriusXM ' s database Files and records. Plaintiffis informed and
believes, and on that basis alleges that Defendants have engaged Rovi Corporation to supply the
,
l7 metadata, including the metadata relating to Pre-1972 Recordings unlawfully streamed to
18 subscribers in California , and that such metadata contains the name and location of the owners
19 thereof . The Class members are further ascertainable through methods typical of class action
20 practice and procedure.
21
11. Plaintiff is informed and believes , and alleges thereon , that the Pre - 1972 Recordings
22 misappropriated in California by Defendants number in the millions and are owned by many
23 thousands of Class Members. It is therefore impractical to join all of the Class Members as named
24 Plaintiff s. Further the claims of the Class Members may range from smaller starts to larger sums.
'
25
,
Accordingly, using the class action mechanism is the most economically feasible means of
26 determining and adjudicating the merits of this litigation.
27
12. The claims of Plaintiff ' are typical of the claims of the Class Members , and Plaintiff's
28 I interests arc consistent with and not antagonistic to those of the other Class Members it seeks to
4
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 7 of 23 Page ID #:20
1, 'represerii., Plaintiff and the -other Class Members have all been subject'tomisappropriation of their
2 Pre 972 Recordings-in California, have sustained,actual pecuniary loss and face;irieparable harm
3, from Defendants'
continued misappropriation of their Pre. 1972 Recordings.
no interests that are adverse to, or which conflict with',.the.interests of
13. Plaintiff has
4,,
5 the.othec.Class Members and is ready and"ablc.to fairly and adequately represent aiid'protect the
6. interests of the other Class Members. Plaintiffrbelieves strongly in•the'protection - dfartists'
7 in
rights
'connection with ,their creative work. Plaintiff has raised viable claims for mi appropriation,
8 unfair competition and conversion of the type well established-in California'and reasonably_
9 expected to.be raised by Class Members. Plaintiff will-diligently pursue those:claims. If
Plaintiff may seek leave of the Court to amend this Complaint
.10 necessary,
.
to1nclude additional'
11 class representatives to represent the Class'or additional claims as may be appropriate.' Plaintiff is
12 represented by experienced, qualified and competent counsel who arecommitted to'prosecuting
13 this action.
Common questions of fact and law exist,as-to all Class.Members that plainly
14.
14
15 ptcdominate.over any questions affecting only individual Class Members. These:common legal
16 and , factual questions, which do not vary from Class Member to Class mcnilier ;.and'Which may be
17 deter°mined:without reference to the individual circumstances of any Class Member include,
18 without limitation, the following:
(A)
I j'
(B)
.i
Whether Defendant SiriusXM's reproduction ,,performance,-; distribution or
•22
other exploitation of Pre-1972 Recordings in California•constitutes misappropriation under
23
California Civil Code Section 980(a)(2);
(C)
24
•
or
otherwise exploited Pre-1972 Recordings in the California;
'20
21
Whether Defendant SiriusXM reproduced, performed', distributed
Whether Defendant SiriusXM's reproduction, performance, distribution or
25
other exploitation of Pre»1972 Recordings in the California constitutes unlawful or unfair
26
business acts or practices in violation of California Business
27
1.7200;
&
Professions Code Section
'
c
:
. (D)
28
I
Whether Defendant -SiriusXM's reproduction, performance, distribution or
5
CLASS.ACTION COMPLAINT
n
.'.
..
..
.
_
e ms •
r..
r
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 8 of 23 Page ID #:21
1
other exploitation of Pre-1972 Recordings in California constitutes conversion under
2
California common law;
(E)
3
4
Class can be computed;
5
6
(F)
(G)
Whether Defendant SiriusXM's violation of California Civil Code Section
8
980(a)(2) is continuing, thereby entitling Class Members to injunctive or other equitable
9
relief;
10
II
(14)
Whether Defendant SiriusXM's violation of California Business &
Professions Code § 17200 entitles the Class Members to recover punitive damages;
12
(1) Whether Defendant SiriusXM's violation of California Business & Professions
13
Code § 17200 is continuing, thereby entitling Class Members to injunctive or other relief,
14
c a
Whether Defendant SiriusXM's violation of California Civil Code Section
980(a)(2) entitles the Class Members to recover punitive damages;
7
ot
The basis on which restitution and/or damages to all injured members of the
15
(J) Whether Defendant SiriusXM's violation of California's common law of
conversion entitles Class Members to recover punitive damages; and
(K)
16
Whether Defendant SiriusXM's violation of California's common law of
17
conversion is continuing, thereby entitling Class Members to injunctive or other relief.
18
15.
A class action is superior to all other available methods for the fair and efficient
19 adjudication of this controversy, since individual litigation of the claims of all Class Members is
20 highly impractical. Even if every Class Member could afford to pursue individual litigation, the
21 Court system could not, it would be unduly burdensome to the courts in which individual
22 ' litigation of numerous cases would proceed. Individualized litigation would also present the
23 potential for varying, inconsistent or contradictory judgments and would magnify the delay and
24 expense to all parties and to the court system resulting from multiple trials of the same factual
25 issues. By contrast, maintenance of this action as a class action, with respect to some or all of the
26 issues presented herein, presents few management difficulties, conserves the resources of the
ti
27 parties and of the court system, and
protects the rights of each Class Member. Plaintiff anticipates
28 no difficulty in the management of this action as:
01855
action.
5
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 9 of 23 Page ID #:22
1
16. Additionally, the prosecution of separate actions by individual Class Members may
2 create a risk of adjudications with respect to them that would, as a practical matter, be dispositive
of the interests of the other Class Members not parties to such adjudications or that would
substantially impair or impede the ability of such nonparty Class Members to protect their
interests. The prosecution of individual actions by Class Members could establish inconsistent
results and incompatible standards of conduct for Defendant SiriusXM.
17. Defendants have engaged in misappropriation, unfair competition and conversion
which has affected all of the Class Members such that final and injunctive relief on behalf of the
Class as a whole is efficient and appropriate.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
10
(For Violation of California Civil Code § 980(a)(2) and Common Law Misappropriation)
12
18. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the allegations set forth in paragraphs I through 17,
13 I above, as though set forth in full herein.
14
19. Plaintiff and the other Class Members have exclusive ownership of their Pre -1972
15 Recordings in California pursuant to California Civil Code § 980(a)(2) quoted above and under
r
16 California common law. By their conduct alleged above, Defendants have violated Plaintiffs and
17 each Class Members' right to exclusive ownership of their Pre-1972 Recordings. The Plaintiff
18 and Class Members have invested substantial time and money in the development of their Pre19
20
21
1972 Recordings.
20. The Defendants have misappropriated the Pre-1972 Recordings at little or no cost
and without license or authority. They have copied the Pre-1972 Recordings owned by Plaintiff
22 and the other Class Members and publicly perform these recordings in California for their
23 subscribers as set forth in paragraph 3, above. Defendants have disregarded the Plaintiffs and
24 other Class Members' "exclusive ownership" of their Pre-1972 Recordings, impaired their ability
to sell, lawfully exploit, or otherwise control their Pre-1972 Recordings and misappropriated these
26 Pre- 1972 Recordings for their own financial gain.
27
21. As a direct and proximate consequence of Defendants' misappropriation of the Pre-
28 1972 Recordings owned by Plaintiff and the Class Members in violation of Civil Code § 980(a)(2)
7
COMPLA
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 10 of 23 Page ID #:23
I as alleged above, Plaintiff and the Class Members have been damaged in an amount that is not as
I yet fully ascertained but which Plaintiff is informed and believes, and alleges thereon, exceeds
3 11 $100,000,000, according to proof.
22. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and alleges thereon, that in engaging in the
5
conduct described above, the Defendants acted with oppression, fraud and/or malice. The conduct
6 of the Defendants has been despicable and undertaken in conscious disregard of the Plaintiff's and
7
each Class Member's rights. Accordingly, Plaintiff and the Class members are entitled to an
8
award of punitive damages against Defendants in an amount sufficient to punish and make an
9
example of them according to proof.
10
za, a
C) o
b ft
G1 o
23. Defendants' conduct is causing, and unless enjoined and restrained by this Court,
will continue to cause, Plaintiff and each Class Member great and irreparable injury that cannot
12 fully be compensated or measured in money. Plaintiff and the other Class Members are entitled to
13 temporary, preliminary and permanent injunctions, prohibiting farther violation of Plaintiff's and
14 Class Members' exclusive ownership of their Pre-1972 Recordings in California.
15
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
16~
(For Statutory and Common Law Unfair Competition)
p
17
24. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 23,
18 I above, as though set forth herein.
19
25. The acts and conduct of Defendants alleged above constitute an appropriation and
20 invasion of the property rights of Plaintiff and each Class Member to their Pre-1972 Recordings in
21 California, and constitute unfair competition under California Business & Professions Code §
22 17200 and common law. Defendants have engaged in unfair competitive business practices
forbidden by law.
24
26. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintiff and the Class
25 1 Members are entitled to recover all proceeds and other compensation received or to be received by
26 Defendants from their misappropriation of the Pre-1972 Recordings. Plaintiff and the members of
27 the Class have been damaged, and Defendants have been unjustly enriched, in an amount that is
not as yet fully ascertained but which Plaintiff is informed and believes, and alleges thereon,
8
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 11 of 23 Page ID #:24
exceeds S 100,000 , 000, according to proof at trial . Such damages and/or restitution and
1
2 disgorgement should include a declaration by this Court that Defendants arc constructive trustees
3
for the benefit of Plaintiff and the other Class Members, and an order that Defendants convey to
4
Plaintiff and Class Members the gross receipts received or to be received that are attributable to
5 Defendants misappropriation of the Pre - 1972 Recordings.
6
27. Plaintiff is informed and believes , and alleges thereon, that in engaging in the
7 conduct as described above , the Defendants acted with oppression , fraud and/or malice. The
conduct of the Defendants has been despicable and undertaken in conscious disregard of
8
9 Plaintiff's rights . Accordingly, Plaintiff and the Class Members are entitled to an award of
10 punitive damages against Defendants , and each of them, in an amount sufficient to punish and
II make an example of them according to proof at trial.
C] o
o
ci
28.
12
Defendants' conduct is causing, and unless enjoined and restrained by this Court,
13 will continue to cause , Plaintiff and the Class Members great and irreparable injury that cannot
14 fully be compensated or measured in money. Plaintiffand the other Class Members are entitled to
15 temporary , preliminary and permanent injunctions , prohibiting further violation of Plaintiffs and
m~
16 the other Class Members right to exclusive ownership of their Pre-1972 Recordings and further
17 acts of unfair competition pursuant to California Business
& Professions Code § 17203.
I8
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
19
(For Conversion)
29.
Plaintiff hereby incorporates the allegations set forth in paragraphs I through 28,
21 above , as though set forth in full herein.
30, Plaintiff and each Class Member are, and at relevant times were , the exclusive
22
I
23 owner of all right , We and interest in and to their Pre-1972 Recordings and possession thereof in
24 I California.
3II. By their acts and conduct alleged above , Defendants have converted Plaintiff's and
25
I.'
ar
26 the Class Members' property rights in their Pre - 1972 Recordings for Defendants' own use and
27 wrongful disposition for financial gain.
28
1
32. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants ' conversion , Plaintiff and the
9
1141
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 12 of 23 Page ID #:25
1 members of the Class have been damaged, and Defendants have been
unjustly'enriched, in an
2 amount that is not as yet fully ascertained but•which Plaintiff is infonned.arid.believes, and alleges
3, thcreori,-cxceeds $100,000,000 according to proof at trial. Defendants are'consttuctive trustees for
4 the +benef t of Plaintiff and Class Members, and the Court should order Defendants to convey to
5 Plaintiff .and the Class Members the gross receipts received or to be recdived from,.Defendaths
6 misappropriation of the Pre-1972 Recordings.
7
i 33.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges,,that in engaging 'iii the
8 conduct: as described: above, the Defendants acted with oppression, fraud and/or malice. The
9 conduct,'of the.Defendants has been despicable and undertaken in•conscious disregardof
10 Plaintiffs rights. Accordingly, Plaintiff and each member of the Classils entitled tb
an award of
11 puniiiye damages against defendants, and each of them, in an amount sufficient to'- punish and
Ha
12 make an exaniple,ofthern.according to proof at trial,
13
34. Defendants' conduct is causing, and unless enjoined and "restrained'by this Court will
14 continue to -cause, Plaintiff and the Class Members , great and irreparable injury that cannot fully be
15 compensated or. measured in money. Plaintiff and each Class Member arc entitled 'to temporary,
:t6 preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting further acts of conversion of theii 1 Pre-1 972
17 Recordings.
18
19
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, on behalf of itself and the other Class: Members,, prays
for
20 Judgment against Defendants, and each of them, as follows:
21 Rcgardi•>ng the Class Action:
22,
23 1
e 24
25
a
L That this is a proper class action maintainable pursuant to the applicable; provisions of the
California Code of Civil Procedure; and
2: That the 'named Plaintiff is appropriate to be appointed represents ti e:of the respective
Class,
Cause of Action ForMisappropriation against ,all'Defenda'ats:
26 On The'Fiest
,
27
1•! For compensatory damages in excess of $100,000,000 according to.proof
28•
2! Punitive and'exemplary damages according to proof trial; and
to
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
,
at trial';
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 13 of 23 Page ID #:26
1"
3. A temporary, preliminary , and permanent injunction enjoining and restraining Defendants,
2
and their respective agents , servants , directors, officers , principals , employees,
3
representatives , subsidiaries and affiliated companies , successors , assigns , and those acting
4
in concert with them or at their direction, from directly or indirectly misappropriating in
5
any mariner the Pre-1972 Recordings in California, including without limitation by directly
6
or indirectly copying, reproducing, downloading , distributing , communicating to the
7
public, uploading, linking to, transmitting, publicly performing, or otherwise exploiting in
8
any manner any of the Pre-1972 Recordings.
9 On The Second Cause of Action For Unfair Compelitionaaaanst all Defendants:
10
1. For compensatory damages in excess of $ 100,000 ,000 according to proof at trial;
11
2. Punitive and exemplary damages according to proof at trial;
12
g
ki
3. Imposition of a constructive trust;
~
13
4. Restitution of Defendants' unlawful proceeds, including Defendants' gross profits; and
14
5 . A temporary , preliminary ,
and permanent injunction enjoining and restraining Defendants,
15
and their respective agents, servants, directors , officers, principals, employees,
16
representatives , subsidiaries and affiliated companies, successors , assigns, and those acting
17
in concert with them or at their direction, from directly or indirectly misappropriating in
18
any manner the Pre-1972 Recordings, including without limitation by directly or indirectly
19
copying reproducing downloading distributing communicating to the public, uploading,
20
linking to, transmitting, publicly performing, or otherwise exploiting in any manner any of
21
the Pre-1972 Recordings.
C o
,
,
,
,
22 On The Third Cause of Action For Conversion against all Defendants:
23
1. For compensatory damages in excess of $100,000,000 according to proof at trial;
24
2. Punitive and exemplary damages according to proof at trial;
25
3. Imposition of a constructive trust;
26
4. Restitution of Defendants' unlawful proceeds, including Defendants' gross profits; and
27
5, A temporary , preliminary , and permanent injunction enjoining and restraining Defendants,
rt?
:r.
28
and their respective agents, servants, directors, officers, principals, employees,
li
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 14 of 23 Page ID #:27
representatives, subsidiaries and affiliated companies, successors, assigns, and those acting
2
in concert with them or at their direction, from directly or indirectly infringing in any
3
manner any right in any and all of the Pre-1972 Recordings, including without limitation
4
by directly or indirectly copying, reproducing, downloading, distributing, communicating
5
to the public, uploading, linking to, transmitting, publicly performing, or otherwise
6
exploiting in any manner any of the Pre-1972 Recordings.
7 On All Causes of Action:
8
I. For reasonable attorneys' fees and costs as permitted by law;
9
2. For prejudgement interest at the legal rate; and
10
11
~? o m
1
11U5
z d
12
13
14
3. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
DATED: July 31, 2013
GRADSTEIN & MARZANO, P.C.
HENRY GRADSTEIN
MARYANN R. MARZANO
ROBERT E. ALLEN
-andEVAN S. COHEN
is
m
16
By:
____________________________
H
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
r,.
Ai
radstein
Attorneys for Plaintiff
FLO & EDDIE, INC.
26
27
28
~I S
12
CLASS
INT
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 15 of 23 Page ID #:28
1
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
2
Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of the Class Members, demands a trial by jury of the
3 causes of action alleged in this Complaint,
4
5
6
7
DATED: July 31, 2013
GRADSTEIN & MARZANO, P.C.
HENRY GRADSTEIN
MARYANN R. MARZANO
ROBERT E. ALLEN
-and-
EVAN S. COHEN
8
9
10
Pu
Cin
~ r
L UU111r. ph 1R7 4 por 11111111
11
FLO & EDDIE, INC.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
13
CLASS
C
LASS ACTION COMPLAINT
•
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 16 of 23 Page ID #:29
~
M
1
L
(
3
~
t
I
I
r
'
~
I
r
i
,
1
11
rk,
t^
.. a
'
I
I,
1
is
r ~
~II
t
,
H
!I
I~.
~r
f.
'f
,~
Exhibit A
s'
~.
....E
.
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 17 of 23 Page ID #:30
. /
(1)
(8
(
()
: ( )
i ()
T)
s 8)
'(9)
3 10
s
12
A 13
1 14
15
16
IT
18
(t19
(20
( ( 21
(22
f8
25
26
Al]. My Problems
(57)Lave minus Zero
Bachelor Rather
Ball be krinx , Pall Bearing
a ( 58
Battle of The Hands
has eat
Can I Oo On
(61
(62
' 63
t
65
66
Better
Can't You Hur The can
Cat In The Vineler
hieifeZ
Lat Right
e
f677
68
69
TO
Ohristmas Ii My Tyre Or Tear
Cams Back
come Over
Dance This lane With No
37
38
39
(8)
(U
(
((
i
45
(49)
1
50
(5)
Proe
The
Start
She ' d Rather ee with No
She'll Came Back
She ' s My Girl
( 7 3)
Somerrhara Friday Bight
Sans For You
Sound Asleep
at
ery Are ourroth
Bers
(Tb) Mary Or Rook A Roll
Money
Get Away
(live Lo ►a A Tri al
(T9) Surfer Dan
0) '
Deardrops
' ( 81)))) 'Rank I'll Run Away
(S
82) There Tau Sit Lonely
83)
84 ))
'(85)
8)
" (8 1)
(88)
(
(89
•
law You Loved Me
(90)
( 91)
I Can't Stay
I oat out of Breath
I Xnov That You'll Be Thera
92)
9 )
98 )
1 Need Sa scan
It Ain't ma orbs
1
It was A Very Good Year
John A Julie
Tao Young 3o Be One
Turn Between 'leaptatians
4sbessa AM The Dragon
Walk In The Sun
walk n Song
Wur Or Gores."
'
We
Ain't Gonna Party
No Bare
we Both Were Young
Weil Root Aptin
Who would Ever Think
That I would NarrY
Margaret
96)
97)
a (99)
(100)
Lot Me • Be
fie No Dorn
Too ''uab Neartaiek Peelin'
95) Wrong Pzoe The Start
'(9$ )
Let The Coal winds Blow
52 ) Let's Peat A Beat It
51) Lik e A Rolling Stone
551)
Laughing
(' ) Strangers Are Our Friends
Food
Last '!RIng I Remember
Person Without A Cars
Rues or wows i Plovers
Say Girl
Se attteb Song
Sh! Always Leaves He
80 does Love
(T)
' (TS)
-( T6
Foggy water
dust A Roam
(U ) last
Oh, D.ddy
On A Summer' s Day
(Ti)
40 It Only I mad The Time
81 I'm 'Rte Nan
Is It Any Vander
1421
Makin' My Hind up
Xe About You
(T2) So You Want To On A
Women
Down In Suburbia
Earth Anthem
Elerrare
Eve Of Destruction
Plyin' High
and Oaid
28 ) Good Bye Surprise
(29) The Ori Reaper of Love
'(30) Guide Par A Married Nan
(31 Happy Together
(32 got Little Rats
(33 Hausa Of Pain
(3 4 House On the Hill
36
(59)
(64
Can't I Get To mow You
Glittslr
(39
Love In The City
(56)
Ahnst There
You Baby
You Don't Have To Walk
~
Y
What I mean
You 9humid Ate
Your Maw Said You
Cried
Like It Or Not
(55) Like The Seasons
$CRULg A
~.i
~ .a
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 18 of 23 Page ID #:31
CM-010
ATTORNEY OR PARTY wmrour M C1ORNEY (Nam•, S
'
FOR CD4. TUSEONL r
lua pt, an7adi•si#
,
GMDSTEIN & MARZANO , P.C.
,lenry Gradstel n ( SBN 89747)
Maryann R . Mariano ( SBN 96867 ); Robert E. Allen ( SBN 166589)
6310 San Vicente Boulevard, Suite 510
Los Angeles, California 90048
FAX NO:
TELEFHONENO .: ( 323) 776-3100
Plaintiff t' LO & EDDIE, INC.
ATTORNEY FOR
IUPERiOR COURT OF CALIF ORNIA, COUNTY O F LOS ANGELES
sTRELTAConse
FILED
Los Angeles Superior Court
AUG 0 1 2013
111 North Hill Street
rauUNO ADORE54:
crtYANO ZICODE: L os
Jahn R.
Angeles, 90012
BY KA ~S
CASE NAME: FLO & EDDIE , INC. v, SIRIUS XM RADIO , INC. at al.
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET
(Amount
Limited
(Amount
demanded
demanded is
Unlimited
❑
, ~xect~ive ~~icerlCd~ttk
, C]eput<j
,
Complex Case Designation
Counter
❑
❑
Joinder
Filed with first appearance by defendant
DEPT:
t. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case:
Auto Tort
❑ Auto ( 22)
❑ Uninsured motorist ( 45)
Other Pi/POIWD ( Personal lniurylPmperty
DamageiWrongful Death ) Tort
❑
Asbestos (04)
❑
❑
Product liab lity (24)
Medical malpractice ( 45)
❑
❑
❑
❑
our oantraCt (37)
Real Property
❑ Eminent domaiMnverse
condemnation ( 14)
Other PI/PDN D ( 23)
Mon•PUPDWD (Other) Tort
J
❑
Contract
breach of contred /warranty ( 06)
0 Rule 3 .740 collection ( 05)
❑ Other collections ( 09)
❑
Insurance coverage ( 1 B)
❑
Wrongful eviction (33)
B os ir (Sss tort/unfair business practice (07) [J Other real prtiperty ( 26)
Unlawful Detainer
Ctvii rights (08)
Defamation ( 13)
Fraud ( 1 B)
❑
❑
intellectual property ( 10)
Professional negligence (25)
other non - PVPDAND tan (35 )
Employment
❑
❑
Wro ngful termination (36)
n
Other nmplavment ( 15)
2. This case IZ9 is
8
Commercial (31)
Residentia l ( 32)
[J Drugs ( 38)
udlclal Review
J— l Asset forfielture (05)
k..
Petition to: arbitration award ( 11)
[J
❑
Writ of mandate (02)
❑
Other judicial review (39)
Provisionally Complex Civil Llttgatlon
(Cat. Rules of Court= rater 3 .40o4,4031
❑ AntltrustlTrada regulation (03)
❑ Construction dated (10)
❑ Mass tort (40)
❑
Securities litigation (26)
U
Envimnmentalfrordc tort (30)
Insurance coverage claims arising from the
above listed provisionally complex case
types (41)
Enforcement of Judgment
p, 3 Enforcement of judgment (20)
Miscaitaneous ChM Complaint
a
RICO (27)
Other complaint (not specified above) (42)
Miscellaneous Civil Petition
k_,,,u Partnership and corporate governance (21)
❑ Other petition (not spectied above) (43)
U is not complex under rule 3,400 of the California Rules of Court. If the case is complex, mark the
factors requiring exceptional judicial management:
a. 0 Large number of separately represented parties d . ®
b. ® Extensive motion pract ice raising ditticuit or novel e. ❑
Large number of witnesses
Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts
issues that will be time-consuming to resolve
In other counties , states , or countries , or in a federal court
f. ❑ Substantial postjudgment Judicial supervision
c. ® Substantial amount of documentary evidence
3. Remedies sought (check all that apply): a . 0 monetary b . ® nonmonelary : declaratory or injunctive relief
c. ® punitive
4. Number of causes of action (specify);
5. This case
®
is
❑
is not a class action suit.
5. If there are any known related cases , the and serve a notice of related terse . ( You may use form CM-015.)
Date: August 1, 2013
MARYANN R. MARZANO
rrvPS
nR
►
PRWT MAYF1
. "T2JRVf
NOTICE
P
ATTORNPV PA• PA 1Y,
V
• Plaintiff mjrst file this cover sheet with the first paper filed in the action or proceeding (except small claims cases or cases filed
17
3.
J1
11
under Use Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.220,) Failure to file may result
in sanctions.
• File this cover sheet in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule.
'If this case Is complex under rule 3 . 400 at seq . of the California Rules of Court . you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all
other parties to the action or proceeding.
• Unless this is a collections case under rule 3 . 740 or a complex case , this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes only. _ _
FarmAdmw1cwLUr40 ryua~
Judii l Camel u caumq
CAW10 IR.v..lur 1 .20 071
CIVIL. CASE COYER f3HEllT
",RA dOft^ng"EX . 3.xxl,3xaa .s403 , 3?40;
rd, 3tw vd71 d
hreor Adrrer * tY i. tht. 3. t0
:
curaxnrdodDov
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 19 of 23 Page ID #:32
CM-010
•
INSTR~wT1ONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET
To Plaintiffs and Others Filing First Papers . If you are filing a first paper ( fat example , a complaint ) in a civic case, you must
complete and file, along with your first paper, the CMI Case Cover Shoot contained on page 1. This informalion will be used to compile
statistics about the types and numbers of cases tiled , You must complete items I through 0 on the sheet . In item 1 , you must check
one box for the case type that best describes the case . If the case fits both a general and a more specific type of case listed In item 1,
check the more specific one. If the case has multiple causes of action , check the box that best indicates the primary cause of action.
To assist you In completing the sheet , examples of the cases that bebng under each case type In Item 1 are provided below. A cover
sheet must be filed only with your initial paper . Failure to file a cover sheet with the first paper teed In a civil case may subject a party.
its counsel, or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the California Rules of Court.
To Parties In Rule 3 .740 Collections Cases. A "collections case" under rule 3.740 Is defined as an action for recovery of money
owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25.000. exclusive of Interest and attorneys fees, "rising from a transaction in
which properly , services , or money was acquired on credit . A collections case does not Include an action seeking the following : ( 1) tort
damages , ( 2) punitive damages , (3) recovery of real property , (4) recovery of personal property , or (5) a prejudgment writ of
attachment . The Identification of a case as a rule 3 . 740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt from the general
time-for- service requirements and case management rules , unless a defendant tiles a responsive pleading . A rule 3.740 collections
case will be subject to the requirements for service and obtaining a judgment in rule 3.740,
To Parties In Complex Cases . In complex cases only , parties must also use the Civil Case Cover Sheet to designate whether the
case Is complex _ It a plaintiff believes the case Is complex under rule 3 .400 of the California Rules of Court , this must be Indicated by
completing the appropriate boxes in items I and 2. If a plaintiff designates a case as complex, the cover sheet must be served with the
complaint on all parties to the action . A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of Its first appearance a joinder In the
plaintiff' s designation , a counter -designation that the case is not complex . or, It the pl:IIntlft has made no designation , a designation that
the case is complex.
Auto Tort
Auto (22 )- Personal lrrurylProperty
DamageNVrongful Death
Uninsured Motorist (48) (N the
case !evolves an unlnswed
r ofodsl claim subject to
arbitration , Chick this item
instead of Auto)
Other PUPD1WD (Personal injury!
Property Damag+elWrongful Death )
Tort
Asbestos (04)
Asbestos Property Damage
Asbestos Personal Injury!
Wrongful Death
Ptcxtuct Uat oy (not asbestos or
loxiclenvlronmental) ( 24)
Medical Malpractice (45)
Medicitl Malpractice -
Physicians 8 Surgeons
Other Professional Health Care
Malpractice
Other PI/PDM/D (23)
Premises Liability (e , g., slip
and fall)
Intentional Bodily lnjuryJPDANO
(e.g.. assault, vandalism )
Intentional Infliction of
Emotional Distress
Emotional Distress
Other PIIPOIWO
Non4'IIPDMWD (O ther) Tort
Business Teri/Unfair Business
Practice (07)
Civil Rights ( e.g,, discrimination .
raise arrest ) (Trot clot!
libel)
Professional Negligence ( 25)
Legal Malpractice
Other Professional Malpractice
(not rnedkaaf or iepaq
Other Non-PI/PDAND Tort (35 )
Employment
Wrongful Termination (38) Other
Employment 15)
(
craa tom -r t.
i
ContracWarranty Breach-Seller
Plaintiff (not fraud or negliperx :e)
Negligent Breach of Contract)
Warranty
Other Breach of ConiracWlarranty
Collections ( e.g., money owed , open
book accounts) (09)
Collection Case-Seller Plaintiff
Other Promissory NotelColle tlons
Case
tnsur'amoe Coverage (not pmvisbnaRY
complex) ( 18)
Auto Subrogation
Other Coverage
Other Contract (37)
Contractual Fraud
Other Contract Dispute
Real Property
Eminent Domainllnverse
Condemnation (14)
Wrongful Eviction ( 33)
Other Real Property (e.g,. quiet title) (26 )
WOE of Possession of Real Property
Mortgage Foreclosure
Quiet Tole
Negligent Infliction of
harassment) (05)
Defamation (e.g., slander ,
(13)
Fraud (16)
Intellectual Property ( 19)
CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES
Contract
Breach of ConirataIWarranty (06)
Breach of Rentauteass
Contract (not unlawful detainer
or wrorrgtt+f eviction)
Other Real Property (not eminent
domain, landlonttenant . or
faecosum )
Unlawful Detainer
Commercial (31)
Residential (32)
Drugs (38) (if the case ihvolvis !ldepal
drugs, check this !tern; otherwise.
report as Ccmmerriaf or Residential)
Judicial Review
Asset Forfeiture f05)
Petition Re : Arbitration Award ( 11)
Writ Of Mandate ( 02)
Writ-Administrative Mandamus
Writ-Mandamus on Limited Court
Case Matter
Writ-Other Limited Court Case
Review
Other Judicial Review ( 39)
Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal.
Rules of Court Rules 3.400-3.453)
Ant'rtrusttrrade Regulation (03)
Construction Oefect (10)
Cults Involving Mass Tort (40)
Securities Litigation (28)
Env€ronmentatlTo lc Tort (30)
Insurance Coverage Claims
(erising from provltifonefy complex
case type Haled above) (41)
Enforcement of Judgment
Enforcement of Judgment (2D)
Abstract of Judgment (Out of
County)
Confession of Judgment (nondomestic relations)
Sister State Judgment
Administrative Agency Award
(not unpaid taxes)
PetitionlCertiflc atton of Entry of
Judgment on Unpaid Taxes
Other Enforcement of Judgment
Case
Miscellaneous Civil Complaint
RICO (27)
Other Complaint (cwt specJf>ed
above) (42)
Declaratory Relief Only
Injunctive Relief Only (nonharassment)
Mechanics Uen
Other Commercial Complaint
Case (non-fortrton - complex)
Other Civil Complaint
(non-foilmon.ccrplax)
Miscellaneous Civil Petition
Partnership and Corporate
Governance (21)
Other Petition (not specified
above) (43)
Civil Harassment
Workplace Violence
Eider/Dependent Adult
Abuse
Election Contest
Petition for Name Change
Petition for Relief From Late
Clain
Other Civil Petition
Rw+ew of Health OAicar Ord.r
Notice of Appeal-Labor
Commissioner Appeals
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET
z at 7
Amsea n 1..prriI I, ire
wit,, r'crsruWbrkAa. c+xn
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 20 of 23 Page ID #:33
. EASE M MER
1 srrt)n1t WIE7
PLO & EDDIE, INC, V. SIRIUS XM RADIO, INC., et at.
WC 51 7fl 2
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM AND
STATEMENT OF LOCATION
(C ERTIF ICATE OF GROUNDS FOR ASSIGNMENT TO C OU RTHOUSE LOCATION)
This form Is required pursuant to Local Rule 2.0 In all new civil case filings In the Los Angeles Superior Court.
Item 1. Check the types of hearing and fill in the estimated length of hearing expected for this case:
JURY TRIAL?
(K YES CLASS ACTION?
19 YES LIMITED CASE?
0 HOURS! DAYS
❑ YES TIME ESTIMATED FOR TRIAL, 15
Item U. indicate the correct district and courthouse location (4 steps - If you checked "Limited Case". skip to Item III, Pg. 4):
Stop 1: After first completing the Civil Case Cover Sheet form, find the main Civil Case Cover Sheet heading for your
case in the left margin below, and, to the right in Column A. the Civil Case Cover Sheet case type you selected.
Step 2: Check
Superior Court type of action in Column
B below which best describes the nature of this case.
Step 3: in Column C, circle the reason for the court location choice that applies to the type of action you have
checked. For any exception to the court location, see Local Rule 2.0.
Appiicabte Reasons for Choosing Courthouse Location (see Column C below)
1.Claris adlons must be tiled in the Stanley Mosk Courthouse, central district.
2. May be filed In central (other county, of no bodily Injury!property damage).
3. Location where cause of action arose.
4, Location where bodily inlury, death or dama9e occurred.
5. Location where perrormanoe required or defendant resides,
8. Location of property or permanently garaged vehicle.
7. Location where petitioner resides.
8. Location wherein detendarWrespondent functions wholly.
9. Location whom one or more of the parties reside.
10. Location of Labor Commissioner Office
Step 4: Fill in the information requested on page 4 In Item III; complete Item IV. Sign the declaration.
A
B
C
Civil case Cover Sheet
Category No,
Type of Action
(Check only one)
APplible Reasons See Step 3 Above
Auto (22)
O A7100 Motor Vehicle - Personal lnjurylProperty Damege/Wmngrut Death
1., 2., 4.
❑ A7110 Personal InjurylPfoperty DamagetWrongtul Death — Uninsured Motorist
1.. 2.. 4.
O A6070 Asbestos Property Damage
2.
❑ A7221 Asbestos - Personal lnjuryWrongful Death
2.
❑ A7280 Product LiabHrty (not asbestos or Ioxic!environmentat)
1., 2., 3., 4, 8.
❑ AT210 Medical Malpractice - Physicians & Surgeons
L4.
O A7240 Other Professional Health Cars Malpractice
1.,
❑ A7250 Premises liability (e.g., slip and fail)
1. 4.
1 •4
o t
Uninsured Motorist (46)
ASbestas (04)
1
Prodict Liability (24)
Medical Malpractice (45)
Other
Personal Injury
Property Damage
Wronmi death
(23)
iN
LACIV 109 (Rev. 03111)
LASC Approved 03-04
0 A7230
Intentional Bodily Injury/Property Dania geP !rongfuI Death (e.g.,
assault, vandalism, sic.)
❑ A7270 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
0 A7220 Other Personal Injury/Property Dama e/Wron l Death
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM
AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION
4.
t., 3.
"4,
Local Rule 2.0
Page 1 of 4
UaWr . rya,
Ass
wwyF WzdFwcw
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 21 of 23 Page ID #:34
I CASE NUMBER
SHORT Tm.E:
FLO & EDDIE INC. v. SIRIUS XM RADIO INC.. et al,
,
,
A
B
C
Civil Case Cover Sheet
Type of Action
Applicable Reasons -
Category No.
(Chem only one)
See Stop 3 Above
Business Tort ( 07)
_
Li
®A6029 Other CommerctaYBusiness Tort (not fraudlbreach of contract)
0 3.
Civil Rights ( 08)
[} A6005 Civil RightsfDiscrimination
1., 2., 3.
Defamation (13)
❑ A6010 Defamation (slanderilibel)
1., 2.. 3.
o
c
❑ A6013 Fraud (no contract)
Fraud (16)
Professional Negligence (25)
Other ( 35)
Wrongful Termination (36)
0.
E
Other Employment ( 15)
1 ., 2., 3.
❑ A6025 Other Non - Personal Injury/Property Damage tort
2..3.
❑ A6037 Wrongful Termination
1., 2.. 3.
A8024 Other Employment Complaint Cast
1.. 2.. 3.
a A8109 Labor Commissioner Appeals
10.
❑ A6004 Breach of Rentats.ease Contract ( not unlawful detainer or wrongful
2.. S.
eviction)
Breach of Contract) Warranty
(06)
(not Insurance)
❑
A6008 ContractiWarranty Breach .Seller Plaintiff (no fraud/negligence)
Coll eWans (09)
U
Insurance Coverage (18)
Other Contract (37)
Erttinent Domairtlinverse
Condemnation (14)
a
Wrongful Eviction ( 33)
0
f;!
Other Real Property (Z6)
(31)
2., 5,
A6012 Other Promissory Note1COBecttons Case
❑ A6015 Insurance Coverage (not complex)
i. 2 •. 5„ B.
❑ A6009 Contractual Fraud
1., 2 , 3., 5.
❑ AS031 TOrtlous Interference
1.,
❑ AW27 Other Contract Dlspute ( not breachlinsurancelfraudlrtegligence )
1., 2., 3., 8.
❑ A7300 Eminent OornalnlCondemnetion
Number of parcels
❑ A6018 Mortgage Foreclosure
2.. 6.
D A6032 Quiet We
2 .• 6,
2., 6,
❑ A6021 Unlawful Detainer-Commercial ( not drugs or wrongful eviction)
Unlawful Dt takxlr - Residential (not drugs or wrongful cvlcllon)
A6020
0
r^t
Post-Forecloeure 3+!
unlawful Detainer - Drugs ( 38)
LACIV
109 (Rev. 03 1 1 1)
fASC Approved 03-04
2.
(0 AW23 Wrongful Eviction Case
Unlawful Detainer-Residential
Unlawful Detainer-
1 " 2 .5.
A6002 Collections Case -Seller Plaintiff 2 ., 5., 6.
❑
o A8060 Other Real Property (not eminent domain , landlordltenant . foreclosure)
Unlawful Detainer-Commerclat
2.. 5.
❑ A6019 Negligent Breach of CorthactNvarranty Ino fraud)
0 A6026 Other Breath of Contracilvvarranty (not fraud Or negligenC,)
c
0
1 .. 2., 3.
❑ A6017 Legal Malpractice
❑ A6050 Other Professional Malpractice ( not medical or legal)
❑
2 , 6.
2.6,
A6020F Unlawful petalr+ar - iat Feraclosure
2., 6.
A8022 Unlawful Detainer.Drugs
2.6.
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM
AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION
Local Rule 2.0
Pa e 2 of 4
,a_ . tNrr, t_
w.v ts+wnau' F'Iwv.e~n
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 22 of 23 Page ID #:35
. CASE NUMAEA
SHa 1r1LE.
FLO & EDDIE, INC. V. SIRIUS XM RADI©, INC., et al.
A
B
C
~vit Case Cover Sheet
Category No,
Type of Action
Applicable Reasons.
(Check only one)
See Step 3 Above
❑ A6108 Asset Forfeiture Case
2 .. 6.
❑ A8115 PaWon to ContpellConfirmNacate Arbitration
2-. 5.
❑ A6151 Writ. - Adrninbtrative Mandamus
2., 8.
❑ A6152 Writ • Mandamus on Limited Court Case Matter
2.
❑ A8153 Writ - Other Limited Court Case Review
2.
Other Judicial Review ( 39)
❑ A6150 Other Wr WJudicial Review
2 -, 8.
Antitrust/Trade Regulation ( 03)
❑ A6003 AntilrustlTrade Regulation
1 .. 2., 8.
❑ AB007 Construction Defect
1., 2., 3.
❑ AM Claims Involving Mass Tort
i., 2, 6.
❑ A6035 Securities Litigation Case
I., 2.. 8.
Asset Forfeiture ( 05)
Petition re Arbitration ( 11)
R
ac
Writ of Mandate (02)
ii
Construction Defect (10)
Clams Involving Mass Tort
ro
(40)
a
E
0
Securities Litigation ( 28)
.2~
Is
Toxic Tan
0
Is
Environmental (30)
M
Insurance Coverage Claims
ham Complex Case (41 )
IL
O
r-t
nee
❑ A6014 insuranc
(com p lex case onl y)
CraetSubttion
ovegogep
1., 2., 3.. 6.
1., 2., 5.. 8.
2.9.
❑ A5160 Abstract of Judgment
2.. 0,
Enforcement
❑ A6107 Confession of Judgment ( non domestic relations)
2.. 0.
of Judgment ( 20)
Q A6140 Adminiskattvu Agency Award (not unpaid tams)
2., 8.
❑ A6114 Petitton/CerSficate for Entry of Judgment an Unpaid Tax
2., 6.
❑ AM112 Other Enforcement of Judgment Case
2.. 8., 9.
❑ A6033 Racketeering (RICO) Case
1., 2., 8.
❑ A6030 Declaratory Relief Only
1., 2., 8.
❑ A6040 Injunctive Relief Only (not domesllCMarassrnent)
A6011 Other Comm e rcial Complaint Case (non-toi lnon-cumplex)
2., 8.
Other Complaints
(Not Specified Above ) (42)
Partnership Corporation
Goveniance (21)
C0
a a.
A6038 Toxic Tort/Environmental
❑ A6141 Sister State Judgment
RICO (27)
rdE
❑
Other Petitions
(Not Specified Above)
tj
yS
LACIV 109 (Rev. 03111)
LASC Approved 03.04
(43)
❑ A6000 Other Civil Complaint ( non-tod/non - complex )
1., 2.. 8.
1..Z., B.
d A6113 Partnership and Corporate Governance Case
2.. 8.
❑ A6121 Ckri Harassment
2.. 3., 9.
0 A6123 Workplace Harassment
2., 3., 9.
r
A6124 ElderlDependent Aduti Abus e Case
❑
2.,
❑ A619D Election Contest
2.
❑ A6110 PetHlan foe Change of Name
2., 7.
❑ Ml 70 Petition for Relief from Late Claim Law
2., 3., 4., 8.
O P6100 Other Civil Petition
2.. 9,
❑
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM
AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION
a, 9.
Local Rule 2.0
Pa e 3 of 4
A:P.nru r,ep.Lrer. Inc.
Flmy turn
~~+' E71~CE1 .,,,,,
Case 2:13-cv-05693-PSG-RZ Document 1-1 Filed 08/06/13 Page 23 of 23 Page ID #:36
CA$E MUMBER
FHaRT~rlTLE :
FLO & EDDIE, INC. V. SIRIUS XM RADIO. INC., et al.
Item Ill. Statement of Location : Enter the address of the accident, party's residence or place of business , performance , or other
circumstance indicated i n item II., Step 3 on Page 1. as the proper reason for filing in the court location you selected.
AO0RESS:
REASON : Check the appr o priate boxes for the numbers Shown
under Columi C for the type of action that you have selected for
this case .
1.
Flo & Eddie, Inc.
1180 South Beverly Drive
Suite 510
02.0 3. 04.05.06. 07 . 08.0 9.010.
Crrv;
STATE:
ZIP CODE:
Los Angeles
CA
90035
Item IV. Oeclaratian of Assignment I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true
and correct and that the above - entitled matter Is property tiled for assignment to the
STANLEY MOSK
courthouse in the
CENTRAL
District of the Superior Court of California , County of Los Angeles [Code Civ. Proc ., § 392 et seq ., and Local
Rule 2 . 0. subds . ( b), (c) and (d)).
_
oaten; August 1, 2013
(SIGMA
ATTOR'LEYIFi
MARY NN R. MA
PARrI)
0
PLEASE HAVE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS COMPLETED AND READY TO BE FILED IN ORDER TO PROPERLY
COMMENCE YOUR NEW COURT CASE»
1, Original Complaint or Petition.
2. If filing a Complaint , a Completed Summons form for issuance by the Clerk.
3, Civil Case Cover Sheet. Judicial Council form CM-010,
4.
Civil Case Cover Sheet Addendum and Statement of Location form, LACIV 109, LASC Approved 03-04 (Rev,
0311 1).
50
Payment in full of the filing fee , unless fees have been waived.
6. A signed order appointing the Guardian ad Litem , Judicial Council form CIV-010, if the plaintiff or petitioner is a
minor under 18 years of age will be required by Court in order to Issue a summons,
7. Additional copies of documents to be conformed by the Clerk. Copies of the cover sheet and this addendum
must be served along with the summons and complaint , or other initiating pleading in the case.
4
M
LACIV ttlg Rev. 03111
(
LASC Approved 03'{!4
)
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM
AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION
Local Rule 2.0
Pa e 4 of 4
AWAMN LMAVOL k8c.
×

Report this document