CHIVALRY FILM PRODUCTIONS/JOSEPH ARDITO v. NBC UNIVERSAL, et al.
Chronology/Procedural History concerning the above matter(s).
Corruption in the Federal Courts was to deny "Discovery" a crucial factor in litigation that would have exposed the defendants NBC Universal et al., theft ring, frauds, writer frauds and the bias corruption destroying a fair and impartial system of justice in the Library of Congress and federal courts.
This plaintiff from the inception of the lawsuit claimed his 5 (five) federal copyrights were stolen in a premeditated criminal scheme by NBC Universal et al., who made billions of dollars in revenues on plaintiff's stolen federal copyrights, originally created and owned by Joseph Ardito. The theft ring with intent and premeditation stole this plaintiffs 5 (five) federal protected copyrights and extracted all of the characters, scenes and settings and used these "same" characters, scenes and settings in the unlawfully making of defendant's NBC Universal, et al movies entitled " Meet the Parents", "Meet the Fockers" and "Wedding Crashers".
The defendants NBC Universal, et al., including and not limited to the studio "writers, studio defendants, attorneys, a doctor employed by NBC Universal and friend of the alleged producer who was in fact his patient , a producer and the Library of Congress" were all criminally complicit as they knew the 5 (five) federal protected copyrights were stolen from this plaintiff Joseph Ardito.
The defendants NBC Universal et al., only prevailed by corrupted political connections, conflicts of interest , corrupted judges, corrupted Library of Congress and judicial biases, that "barred discovery" a crucial factor in the cases that would have not only exposed the defendant's theft ring in the stolen federal copyright cases, but would have entitled this plaintiff to billions of dollars in nominal , punitive and treble damages.
NBC Universal, et als., theft ring , was protected by the corrupted LAPD, F.B.I. , U.S. Attorney General’s Office, including and not limited to the corruption in the federal court system and the corrupted Library of Congress that was readily available through defendants attorney to protect the defendants by whatever fraudulent means necessary to evade criminal and civil liabilies.
The political connections are exposed by the federal court judges preciding over these cases, defendants attorneys Prior, Cashman, Sherman and Flynn's conflicts of interest at the Library of Congress in Washington that intentionally tampered with federal evidence to go as far as placing a predated manufactured fraudulent backdated 1991 MTP-VHS with no written copyright found in a black box at the Library of Congress that violated this plaintiff's constitution right to a "fair and impartial" proceeding and/or trial by jury criminally violating this plaintiff's constitutional and civil rights.
Discovery, a crucial factor in this copyright case would have proven this plaintiff's case "beyond any reasonable doubt" a more stringent burden of proof than a "mere preponderance of evidence" the studio defendants NBC Universal et al., were in possession of this plaintiff's Joseph Ardito's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights at all times that were stolen and unlawfully used in defendants NBC Universal et, al., in the unlawful making of defendants NBC Universal, et al., screenplays entitled "Meet the Parents,” “Meet the Fockers” and "Wedding Crashers."
The federal courts by and through numerous criminal frauds violated due process and constitution in protecting the defendants NBC Universal et al., that had with intent and premeditation used plaintiff's 5 (five) federal protected copyrights in a premeditated criminal scheme with the overall intent of barring "discovery" a crucial factor in this multi-billion dollar copyright "theft" infringement case to conceal, subterfuge and protect defendants NBC Universal et al., the theft ring, fraudulent writers, studio defendants, attorneys, a doctor, the Library of Congress and the corruption in the federal courts protecting the defendants NBC Universal., et al from all civil and criminal liabilities.
NBC Universal et al,. studio defendants "knew at all times" that they were in possession of plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights that were stolen by and through their premeditated theft ring allowing the defendants NBC Universal et al., to benefit criminally , monetarily and unlawful in the fraudulent and unlawful making of the defendants NBC Universal, et al ., screenplays entitled "Meet the Parents", "Meet the Fockers" and "Wedding Crashers.”
The theft ring consisted of fraudulent writers, studio defendants, actors, attorneys, doctor linked to the studio defendants , producer and the plaintiff's former law firm, theft ring was also linked to the film producers and distributors that acted unethically and criminally in "concert and collusion" in unlawfully using this plaintiff's 5 (five) federal protected copyrights and throughout the course of litigation, the defendants perpetrated numerous other crimes to sabotaging plaintiff's copyright infringement case through the Library of Congress, including and not limited to the federal court system - all involved in this premeditated theft scheme of stealing and using this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights "extracting" all of the characters, scenes and settings from this plaintiff's 5 (five) federal protected copyrights and putting the "extracted stolen" characters, scenes and settings into defendants NBC Universal et al., screenplays entitled "Meet the Parents" , "Meet the Fockers" , and "Wedding Crashers".
The studio defendants even went a step further after extracting and using all of the plaintiff's "characters, scenes and settings" in this plaintiff's 5 (five) federal protected copyrights. The studio defendants NBC Universal claimed copyrights and original creation!
This plaintiff's copyrighted materials consisted of 5 (five) federally protected copyrights entitled "The Tenant", "The Dysfunctionals" self-explanatory and "The Attorneys" that crashed "Weddings and Funerals" in essence comical satires ridiculing dysfunctional families.
Any unbiased judge, jury, Magistrate or Supreme Court Justice politically connected to NBC Universal et al., and the studio defendants who "read" plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights would have known "beyond any reasonable doubt" that the defendants NBC Universal, et al ., theft ring extracted all of the characters, scenes and settings from this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights and used them in the unlawful making of defendants NBC Universal, et al. screenplays entitled "Meet the Parents", "Meet the Fockers", and "Wedding Crashers.” "Without this plaintiff’s 5 (five) federally protected copyrights, these NBC Universal movies would have never existed"!
The theft ring involved in this plaintiff's stolen federal copyrights were employed at the "same law firm" as this plaintiff, other members of the studio theft ring were the studio defendants,, "friends and writer frauds" linked to the theft ring that attended undergraduate college with attorneys from the "same law firm" located at 150 William Street, 19 floor, New York, New York, or knew Robert Epstein, and/or Dr. Americo Semonini and were all contracted by the defendants NBC Universal, et al., in the theft of this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights that were used without the consent or permission of this plaintiff.
Steven Soderbergh a producer, was employed at NBC Universal, Mr. Soderbergh was also a friend and patient of Dr. Americo Semonini who was employed at the "same law firm" as this plaintiff and was in possession of this plaintiff's stolen federal copyrights. Dr. Americo Semonini evaluated personal injury cases for the "same law firm" in New York and lived in California where he was employed as a cardiologist at Cedar Sinai, as well as being employed as a doctor on the sets at "NBC Universal" the defendants in this copyright infringement case.
August 12, 1991: Copyright PAu001571116 - Title: Meet the Parents/by CEM Productions: Copyright Claimant: Greg Glienna; Description: Videocassette: Work Claimed: X Motion picture or filmstrip; Class: PA UNP; Copies: Motion Picture. – The Defendants’ attorneys Pryor, Cashman, Sherman and Flynn, relied on an alleged pre-dated 1991 MTP video-cassette with no written copyright- found in a black box at the Library of Congress to challenge this Plaintiff’s 5 (five) federally protected copyrights and 79 pages of comparisons of characters, scenes and setting extracted from this plaintiff's copyrights that were stolen and unlawfully used in defendants NBC Universal, et al, movies entitled "The Tenant", Meet the Fockers and Wedding Crashers that would have never existed if it weren't for this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights that were stolen and used unlawfully!
May 15, 1996: Copyright TXu-742-462 - Title: The Tenant/The Dysfunctionals; 122p.; Note: Novel; Claimant: Joseph C. Ardito.
December 24, 1996: Copyright TXu-775-750 -Title: The Tenant/ The Dysfunctionals; Description: 176p.; Note: Fiction; Claimant: Joseph C. Ardito.
April 27, 1996: Copyright PAu2-283-460 - Title: The Tenant; Description: 1v.; Note: Screenplay; Claimant: Joseph C. Ardito.
August 21/22, 1998: The above three (3) "Ardito" copyrighted documents were stolen from the residence of Defendant Americo Semonini in Los Angeles, California. (Police Report Filed).
February 2, 1999 - Copyright PAu2-380-629 - Title: The Tenant; Motion Picture-Dramatization - Script; Claimant : Joseph Ardito.
July 19, 1999 - Copyright PAu2-423-720 - Title: The Tenant; Motion Picture; Claimant: Joseph Ardito.
June 16, 2005 - Chivalry Film Productions/Joseph Ardito v. NBC Universal, et al., was filed in the Southern District of New York under Index No. 05 CV 5627. This plaintiff would have filed the complaint in April 2005, however awaited for Robert Epstein, Esq. to revise certain portions of the complaint that would later be used as part of summary judgment favoring the defendants in this case. This plaintiff had no idea that Robert Epstein was in fact part of the theft ring; the jurisdiction and last minute revisions on the complaint didn't hit home until after the summary judgment used by Judge Lynch in his decision. (Judge Lynch: Clinton appointed 1995).
Robert Epstein being part of the "theft ring" manipulated and distorted the jurisdiction and portions of the complaint in a last look over prior to the filing on June 16, 2005, his last minute revisions proved that he was part of the theft ring playing both sides as he kept Pryor, Cashman Sherman & Flynn apprised of this plaintiff's every move throughout the litigation.
This plaintiff finished the complaint in February 2005 and Robert Epstein took 4 months formulating the jurisdiction part of the complaint which led to the complaint being filed in June 2005, as he looked over the causes of actions in the complaint and revised certain portions. Robert Epstein accompanied this plaintiff to file the complaint in federal court on June 16, 2005. Normally, a case filed in federal court is issued an Index number and a judge is selected using a hand tumbling machine. However, as soon as this plaintiff walked up to the clerk, without using the tumbling machine Judge Lynch's name was stamped on my complaint. Mr. Epstein was actually trying to hide from the court’s camera's view, which wasn't possible. This unusual behavior on that day (June 16, 2005) can be verified by the court’s cameras.
Robert Epstein signed a retainer with this plaintiff claiming that this plaintiff could use the law firm’s address located at 150 William Street, 19th fl., New York, NY receiving all of defendants motions and court correspondences.
Robert Epstein and Pryor, Cashman, Sherman & Flynn worked in "concert and collusion" with the premeditated intent of sabotaging this plaintiff's case. This plaintiff received motions and correspondents 4 to 5 days late constantly, and had to request adjournments from the court, this was eventually uncovered by plaintiff as Robert Epstein constantly asking this plaintiff to have him look at any and all oppositions/motions prior to filing and serving them in the court and to Pryor, Cashman, Sherman and Flynn this was solely done with the premeditated intent of "sabotaging plaintiff's case".
December 14, 2005 - Certified Correspondence received from "Tracie M. Coleman" of the Copyright Office of the United States, stating "that pages 191 through 222 were missing from the registered deposit" under PAu2 -283-460, (Ardito Screenplay). That is, while the written copyright was in custody of the Library of Congress’ Copyright Office, pages were mysteriously missing?! This plaintiff’s 5 (five) federally protected copyrights were in fact tampered with by the theft ring, as over “32 pages” were missing, destroyed and extracted from this plaintiff’s federally protected copyrights.
December 14, 2005 - Certified correspondences from "Tracie M. Coleman", of the Copyright Office of the United States, stating "that pages 191-through 222 were missing from the registered deposit" under PAu 2-283-460, (Ardito Screenplay).
March 7, 2006 - Certified correspondence from "Tracie M. Coleman," of the Copyright Office of the United States, concerning PAu-1-571-116 (Meet the Parents), stating, "that the attached photocopies are a true representation of the front of the video-cassette tape, and side of the video-cassette tape cover."
March 28, 2006 - Correspondence from "Richard D. Sharp ," of the Copyright Office of the United States, stating, "This letter is a correction to the certified letter for PAu-1-571-116 (Meet the Parents) sent to you on March 7, 2006. To clarify, there are no "attached photocopies" of "the front of the video-cassette tape" or the "front and side of video-cassette tape cover. The video-cassette tape cover came in an unmarked black container." (Emphasis added.)
Tracie M. Coleman and Richard D. Sharp both gave conflicting sworn statements concerning the alleged 1991 Meet the Parents video-cassette found in a black box at the Library of Congress, claiming no labels or written copyright. (Emphasis added.)
May 19, 2006 - Plaintiff Ardito was granted discovery by Magistrate Debra Freeman , which included taking the sworn deposition of Richard D. Sharp . ( When Plaintiff sought to schedule Mr. Sharp's deposition, he was informed by Tracie M. Coleman , of the Library of Congress Copyright Office , that Mr. Sharp had taken an indefinite sabbatical leave of absence, and she did not know when he was returning.)
Discovery in this case was the "linchpin and crucial factor" that would have exposed the "defendants theft ring" including and not limited to the civil liabilities and criminal liabilities encompassing the blatant theft and altering of federal evidence in this case.
This plaintiff was cynical and apprehensive about Richard D. Sharp's sudden sabbatical leave of absence and decided to go to Washington, DC to further investigate the alleged original pre-dated 1991 Meet The Parents videocassette with no written copyright that became suspect. The pre-dated alleged 1991 MTP after this plaintiff put in a 79 page comparison sheet of characters, scenes and settings stolen from his 5(five) federally protected copyright and Richard D. Sharps sudden sabbatical leave of absence ,conflicting sworn statements by Richard D. Sharp and Tracie M. Coleman became suspect including the pre-dated 1991 MTP video cassette found in a black box at the Library of Congress with "no written copyright"! I had spoken to Robert Epstein and told him that the alleged 1991 MTP video cassette with "no written copyright" found at the Library of Congress had to be forensically evaluated.
July 24, 2006 - Judge Lynch "suddenly stayed" Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman’s May 19, 2006 Discovery Order which included taking the deposition of defendant, Richard D. Sharp and allowed Defendants NBC Universal, et al ., to proceed with a Summary Judgment Motion - "without the ordered discovery".
Judge Lynch after receiving a 79 Pages of comparisons in (10 pts font) relating to similar characters , scenes and settings - proving beyond any reasonable doubt that the defendants were in fact, in possession of this plaintiff's 5 (five) federal protected copyrights and used all of this plaintiff's characters, scenes and settings in the unlawful making of defendants "Meet the Parents", Meet the Fockers" and "Wedding Crashers" .
No Judge in the midst of Discovery "stays discovery" shows a grave indifference and bias against the plaintiff by not allowing a proper investigation for the plaintiff's to proceed without depositions, interrogatories, forensic analysis when conflicting affidavits and a pre-dated 1991 VHS found in a black box at the Library of Congress with "no written copyright" was suspect totally undermining the rule of law.
December 22, 2006 - Summary Judgment was granted by Judge Lynch against Chivalry Film Productions/Joseph Ardito. (“Based upon an unlabeled video-cassette, allegedly submitted to the Copyright Office of the United States "in an unmarked black container, with no written copyright)
The defendants/respondents in the summary judgment motion, did not oppose any opposition or affidavits concerning the "Theft of the stolen Copyrights" relating to the transportation of stolen federal goods interstate, international, wire fraud , mail fraud and did not oppose the police report. In essence the defendants/respondents did not "answer or oppose" anything concerning the "theft" of this plaintiff/appellants 5 (five) federal protected copyrights.
January 9, 2007 - Plaintiff Ardito filed a Notice of Appeal, seeking review of Judge Lynch's Order granting Defendants Summary Judgement, before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
If the trier of fact were to believe that the defendants read the scripts , as alleged by plaintiff, it could be easily infer that the many similarities between the plaintiff's scripts and the defendants was a result of copying and not mere coincidental. This is recognized under the access rule" where the court requires a lower standard of proof on substantial similarities when a high degree of access is shown. However, the defendants NBC Universal, et al., had overwhelming verbatim similarites in characters, scenes and settings that were extracted from this plaintiff's 5 (five) federal protected copyrights stolen and used unlawfully in the defendant's NBC Universal, et al., screenplays entitled "Meet the Parents", "Meet the Fockers" and "Wedding Crashers".
"Meet the Parents", "Meet the Fockers" and "Wedding Crashers" would have never existed without the premeditated theft of this plaintiff's federally protected copyrights by defendants NBC Universal, et al. and this is indisputable.
March 9, 2007 – Plaintiff Joseph Ardito was present at the Library of Congress Copyright Office. (Library Card No. 604660), seeking to examine the materials submitted under copyright number PAu 1-571-116 (Meet the Parents).
When this plaintiff arrived at the Library of Congress, upon requesting the alleged 1991 MTP videocassette, without a written copyright, plaintiff was informed by employees at the Library of Congress it was nowhere to be found. It was later discovered that the alleged original1991 Meet The Parents videocassette offered into evidence in the copyright action was locked in the desk of Richard D. Sharp.
Plaintiff Ardito was subsequently escorted back into the office of Richard D. Sharp where, in the presence of two (2) Copyright Office employees, an attorney and locksmith from the Library of Congress who broke the lock on Richard D. Sharp's desk and retrieved a black videocassette box .
The retrieval was of the black box contained the alleged pre-dated 1991 MTP videocassette that was in fact "marked" 60 minutes crossed out to 72 minutes conflicting the sworn certified statements of Richard D. Sharp and Tracie M. Coleman claiming that the alleged pre-dated 1991 videocassette found in a black box was "unmarked" with no labels!
The alleged pre-dated 1991 MTP videocassette, with no written copyright, that had a label reflecting 60 minutes crossed out to 72 minutes inconsistent with Richard D. Sharp and Tracie M. Coleman's conflicting sworn statements became suspected fraud and had to be forensically evaluated.
After this plaintiff viewed the alleged pre-dated 1991 videocassette movie at the Library of Congress in the presence of two employees, and an attorney representing the Library of Congress, it was concluded that the alleged pre-dated 1991 Meet The Parents video was totally "irrelevant" to the defendants NBC Universal, et al., screenplays entitled Meet the Parents (2000), Meet the Fockers (2004), with "no relevance" to the characters, scenes and settings including and not limited to Wedding Crashers (2005), further proving without plaintiff's 5 (five) federal protected copyrights that were stolen and unlawfully used in the defendants NBC Universal et al., movies "Meet the Parents", "Meet the Fockers" and "Wedding Crashers" was beyond any reasonable doubt a product of plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights and without possession of this plaintiff's stolen federal copyrights, defendants NBC Universal, et al., movies "Meet the Parents", "Meet the Fockers" and "Wedding Crashers" would have never existed!
On August 28, 2007, Plaintiff Ardito requested that Inspector General Michael Peters, investigate the irregularities associated with the custody and contents of the videocassette and box retrieved from the desk of Richard D. Sharp, and for a forensic analysis of the retrieved videocassette and box forcibly removed from the desk of Richard D. Sharp.
October 4, 2007 - United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an Order/Mandate affirming Judge Lynch's Summary Judgment. to the Defendants. Plaintiff had (5) five minutes to oppose summary judgment - the defendants Pryor, Cashman, Sherman & Flynn claimed the Plaintiff couldn't prove "access" the overwhelming characters, scenes and settings extracted in a 79 page comparison sheet was more than enough to prove access that defendants NBC Universal, et al., were in possession of this plaintiff's 5 (five) federal protected copyrights and used them unlawfully. (U.S. Court of Appeals Judges for the Second Circuit: (Judge Pierre N. Leval - Clinton appointed 1993) , (Judge Robert D. Sack Clinton appointed 1998) , ( Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis -nominated by Clinton and upon recommendation of U.S. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y. appointed in 2000).
Judge Lynch's decision to "bar discovery" was used to protect NBC Universal, et al., the studio defendants including and not limited to the theft ring, writer frauds and Library of Congress as "discovery" a crucial factor would have proven "beyond any reasonable doubt" a more stringent burden of proof than a "mere preponderance of evidence" that defendants NBC Universal, et al., through a premeditated criminal scheme stole and unlawfully used this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights the "overwhelming" characters, scenes and settings were in fact a product of copying, theft and plagiarism in the unlawful making of "Meet the Parents, "Meet the Fockers" and "Wedding Crashers"!
Discovery is a crucial factor in all cases; it's a litigation tool in the courts to prove or disprove one's case ! No case can be proven "without discovery" however, the overwhelming characters, scenes and settings without discovery proved that the courts were bias and the defendants were in possession of this plaintiff's 5 (five) federal protected copyrights that were used unlawfully in the making of Meet the Parents, Meet the Fockers and Wedding Crashers and without plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights that were stolen and used unlawfully by the defendants NBC Universal, et al., movies "Meet the Parents", "Meet the Fockers" and "Wedding Crashers" would of never existed!
The corruption and bias of the court "barred discovery" and allowed the defendants NBC Universal , et al to evade in this multi-billion dollar copyright infringement case involving plaintiff's 5 (five) federal copyrights that were "stolen" barring discovery allowed the defendants NBC Universal, et al , to evade depositions, investigations, forensic analysis in where the altering of federal evidence was actually suspect linked to the theft ring , writer frauds, defendants attorneys judges plaintiff's former law firm that created an undue bias in the corrupted court decisions.
Plaintiff does not believe Judge Lynch and the judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (all Clinton appointed) ever viewed defendant's alleged video cassette with no written copyright the pre-dated "horror movie" or truly read this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights. If they did, they would of have concluded that all of the characters, scenes and settings were "extracted" from this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights and used unlawfully in a premeditated criminal scheme allowing defendants NBC Universal, et al to use this plaintiff's stolen federal copyrights unlawfully !
Assuming arguendo, it's fair to say without using this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights - Meet the Parents, Meet the Fockers and Wedding Crashers would have never existed!
The defendants’ attorneys in concert and collusion with Robert Epstein (sabotaging the case) and Pryor, Cashman, Sherman and Flynn have been dealing with the Library of Congress for over 60 years relied on a pre-dated 1991 fraud with no written copyright that would never be forensically evaluated once "Discovery" a crucial factor in case was barred . This plaintiff believes that defendants’ attorneys used their "conflicts of interest" and political connections in the federal court system and the Library of Congress to tamper with federal evidence perpetrating numerous frauds and crimes in the federal courts on behalf of the defendants NBC Universal et al., and the decisions by the district court and United States Court of Appeals including the Supreme Court of the United States of the United States were all "politically motivated" securing the thefts of this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights in bias and corrupted court decisions protecting defendants NBC Universal, et al., from the billions of dollars in civil and criminal liability which now warrants a senate committee investigation in the interest of justice and national security for all Americans!
The pre-dated 1991 Meet The Parents videocassette, in a nutshell, was narrated by a gas station attendant where everyone in the family was tragically killed including the dog.
https://lwlies.com/articles/original-meet-the-parents/
The manufactured fraudulent 1991 MTP VHS with no written copyright did not have any of this plaintiff's characters, scenes or settings and was used by defendants' attorneys and the studios' defendants as a "title" to subterfuge the premeditated criminal theft of this plaintiff's 5 (five) federal protected copyrights Ardito's orginal creation stolen and used by NBC Universal , et al ., in the unlawful making of "Meet the Parents" , "Meet the Fockers" and "Wedding Crashers" !
This plaintiff "welcomes" Gregg Glienna's "horror movie" where everyone in the family is killed including the dog to prove none of the characters, scenes or settings are in Meet The Parents, Meet The Fockers or Wedding Crashers!
All of the characters, scenes and settings were in fact "beyond any reasonable doubt" extracted from this plaintiff's (5) five federally protected copyrights that were stolen by the defendants' NBC Universal, et al., in the unlawful making of Meet The Parents, Meet The Fockers and Wedding Crashers. The defendants, judges and writers were all complicit in using this fraud to conceal and subterfuge the theft of this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights!
The sequel to the alleged pre-dated 1991 Meet The Parents videocassette "horror movie" with "NO WRITTEN COPYRIGHT" found in a black box at the Library of Congress, was a tragedy at the circus that had no bearing or relevance to Meet the Parents, Meet the Fockers or Wedding Crashers.
Plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected written copyrights entitled, “The Tenant /The Dysfunctionals and The Attorneys” were all comical satires ridiculing dysfunctional families; all of the plaintiff's characters, scenes and settings, including The Attorneys that crashed weddings and funerals were originally created by this plaintiff and used by the defendants NBC Universal, et al. in the unlawful making of Meet the Parents, Meet the Fockers and Wedding Crashers without plaintiff's 5 (five) federal protected copyrights that were "stolen" by the defendants NBC Universal, et al. the defendants screenplays entitled "Meet the Parents", "Meet the Fockers" and "Wedding Crashers" would have never existed.
The characters, scenes and settings in a 79 page comparison sheet by this plaintiff's evidence proved beyond any reasonable doubt a more stringent burden of proof than a mere preponderance of evidence that "all" of the characters, scenes and settings were in fact "extracted" from this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights that were stolen by the defendants NBC Universal, et al., and used unlawfully without plaintiff's consent or permission.
The sequel to plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights was to "meet another dysfunctional family.” Squarely fitting into the Meet the Parents and Meet the Fockers sequel - further proving that the defendants through a premeditated criminal scheme stole this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights and used them unlawfully.
Jay Roach, Producer/Director commentaries, "stated unequivocally" in the 2004 Meet The Fockers commentaries, "That we already had the sequel - Meet The Fockers when we were shooting Meet The Parents."
Jay Roach stated in the Meet The Fockers commentaries unequivocally, "That we had an "excellent script" where many movies could be made layers upon layers of laughs."
Jay Roach also stated, "We hired an audience of 100 people to try and delete some scenes but the audience all agreed to keep all characters, scenes and setting in both movies."
This is further proof and indisputable that the defendants NBC Universal, et al., had stolen this plaintiff's 5 (five) federally protected copyrights and used them unlawfully in defendant's "Meet The Parents," "Meet The Fockers," and "Wedding Crashers!"
March 3, 2008 - (On or about.) Joseph Ardito petitioned the United States Supreme Court for a Writ of Certiorari seeking review of The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Order/Mandate affirming Judge Lynch's grant of Summary Judgment to the Defendants. (Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg appointed by Clinton 1993).
Joseph Ardito's Petition for Writ of Certiorari was denied by Justice Ginsburg.
June 4, 2008 - Joseph Ardito petitioned the United States Supreme Court for Rehearing of his abovementioned Petition for Writ of Certiorari.
January 21, 2014 - Chivalry Film Productions/Joseph Ardito v. NBC Universal, et al., filed a "Second Amended Complaint" in the Southern District of New York under Index No. 13 CV 9158. (Tracie M. Coleman and Richard D. Sharp, employees of the Library of Congress were named as additional defendants.)
On January 28, 2014 - Judge Preska dismissed the case "sua sponte" before the defendants, the Library of Congress, had been served or appeared in the action."
April 6, 2014 - Joseph Ardito filed a Notice of Appeal of Judge Preska's "sua sponte" dismissal of Index No. 13 CV 9158.
When Joseph Ardito went to pay the filing fee associated with the abovementioned Notice of Appeal, he was informed by Judge Preska's chambers that if he continued the litigation he would be subject to civil and/or criminal proceedings.
CASE LAW
Rice v. Fox Broadcasting Co., 330 F. 3d 1170, 1174 (9th, Cir. 2003)
This petitioned has alleged facts and produced documents showing ownership. Ownership of the copyrights which gives this petitioner federal statutory protection of his literary works; Respondents’ copying of those literary works; this is infringed. Proof of infringement is shown by evidence of Respondents’ access to Petitioner’s protected literary works and the existence of substantial similarity between Respondents’ motion pictures and those protected works.
Three Boys Music Corporation v. Bolton, 212 F. 3d. 477, 482 (9th, Cir. 2000)
Proof of access is met by proof of “a reasonable opportunity” or “reasonable possibility” of viewing Petitioner’s work.
Metcalf v. Bocho 294 F. 3d 1069, 1074 (9th, Cir 2000)
Proof of access also supports proof of copying. “If the trier of fact were to believe that defendants actually read the scripts, as alleged by this petitioner, it could easily infer that the many similarities between the petitioner’s scripts and respondents’ work were the result of copying, not mere coincidence.”
The court must take into consideration that the respondents’ have unlawfully used this petitioners’ stolen federal copyrights in a premeditated scheme over the years with the intent of extracting all of the characters, scenes and settings this is clearly demonstrated by the new compliant. This petitioner’s federal protected copyrights amount to over 2,500 pages of script that started a trend in the industry. “It could easily infer that the many similarities between petitioners copyrights and respondents copyrights were the result of copying and not mere coincidental.”
Shaw v. Lindheim, 919 F. 2d 1353 (9th Cir. 1990)
“This is recognized in the “access rule” where the court requires a lower standard of proof on substantial similarity when a high degree of access is shown.”
A number of similarities between characters can support a finding of substantial similarity, even if the similarities are common, stock elements.
Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept., 901 F. 2d696, 699 (9th, Cir. 1990)
Cahill v. Liberty Mut. Ins., 80 F. 3d 336, 337, 338 (9th, Cir. 1996)
A FRCP 12(b) (6) dismissal is proper only where there is either a “lack of a cognizable legal theory” or the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory.
Parks School of Business, Inc. v. Symington, 51 F. 3d 1480, 1484 (9th, Cir. 1995)
Everest & Jennings v. American Motorists Ins. Co., 23 F. 3d 226, 228 (9th, Cir. 1994)
In resolving a Rule 12 (b) (6) motion, the District Court must;
(1) Construe the complaint in light most favorable to the petitioner;
(2) Accept all well-pleaded factual allegations as true;
(3) Determine whether petitioner can prove any sent of facts to support a claim that would merit relief.
Dawson v. Hinshaw Music Inc., 905, 4 U.S.P.Q. 2D 1869 (9th Cir. 1987)
Gershwin Publication Corp v. Columbia Artist Management, Inc., 443 F. 2d 1159, (2d. Cir. 1971)
Courts have held that an original combination of individually unprotectable elements is itself protectable, and that a combination of unprotectable elements has been held eligible for copyright protection only if those elements are numerous enough and their selections and arrangements original enough that their combination constitutes an original work of authorship.
Metcalf v. Bochco, 294 F. 3d at 1073 (9th Cir. 2002)
Original Combinations of substantial similarities and arrangement of individually unprotectable ideas can support a finding of copyright infringement.
Celotes Corp. v. Catrett, 477, U.S. 317, 322 (1986)
Anderson v. Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 247-248 (1986)
Gallo v. Prudential Residential Servs, LTD. P’ship, 22F.3d. 1219, 1223 (2d Cir. 1984)
Most importantly, summary judgment should have failed because there are questions of fact in determining this case no depositions, no interrogatories and/or admissions on file, together with affidavits, if any, show there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 (c).
Chambers v. TRM Copy Ctrs., Corp 43 F 3d 29, 37 (2d Cir. 1994)
Summary judgment is improper if there is any evidence in the record from any source from which reasonable inference could be drawn in favor of the non-moving party.
Knight v. U.S. Fire Inc. Co. 804 F. 2D 9, 11 (9th Cir. 1986)
In considering the motion, the court’s responsibility is not to resolve disputed issues of fact, but to assess whether there are factual issued to be tried.
Aliotta v. R. Dakin & Co., 831 F. 2d 898, 902 15 U.S.P.Q. 2d. (9th, Cir. 1987)
Gershwin Publications Corp v. Columbia Artist Management, Inc., 443 F. 2d 1159, (2d. Cir. 1971)
Summary judgment should have failed because there are questions of fact in determining this copyright case the combination of unprotectable elements has been held eligible for copyright protection only if those elements are numerous enough and their selections and arrangements original enough that their combination constitutes an original work of authorship.
SYNOPSIS
