Louisiana Contractors Licensing Service, Inc. v. American Contractors Exam Services, Inc.
3:12-cv-00560
M.D. La.Jul 10, 2014Background
- Plaintiff Louisiana Contractors Licensing Service, Inc. sued defendant American Contractors Exam Services, Inc. for copyright infringement over allegedly reproduced exam questions used in contractor licensing training.
- Defendant moved for summary judgment arguing any copying was de minimis; the Court granted summary judgment on April 7, 2014, dismissing the infringement claim as de minimis.
- After dismissal, defendant sought attorney’s fees under 17 U.S.C. § 505.
- The Court applied Fogerty factors (frivolousness, motivation, objective unreasonableness, compensation and deterrence) in exercising its discretion to award fees.
- The Court found the suit objectively unreasonable given the de minimis doctrine, the small number of allegedly copied questions, and evidence suggesting the suit may have been motivated to hinder defendant’s market presence.
- The Court awarded defendant $48,259.33 in attorney’s fees, noting plaintiff did not contest the amount.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to attorney's fees under § 505 | Claim of actual infringement warranted continuation of suit and does not justify fee shift | Prevailing party; plaintiff’s claim was de minimis and objectively unreasonable, warranting fees | Court exercised discretion to award fees to defendant based on Fogerty factors (objective unreasonableness, possible improper motivation, deterrence) |
| Amount of fees | (No substantive opposition to amount) | Requested $48,259.33 as reasonable | Court awarded the requested $48,259.33 as reasonable and uncontested |
Key Cases Cited
- McGaughey v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 12 F.3d 62 (5th Cir. 1994) (fees under § 505 should be awarded routinely in copyright cases)
- Virgin Records Am., Inc. v. Thompson, 512 F.3d 724 (5th Cir. 2008) (prevailing party not automatically entitled to fees; discretion required)
- Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517 (1994) (sets non-exclusive factors for awarding fees: frivolousness, motivation, objective unreasonableness, compensation and deterrence)
- Creations Unlimited, Inc. v. McCain, 112 F.3d 814 (5th Cir. 1997) (discusses fee-award discretion in copyright cases)
- Lieb v. Topstone Indus., Inc., 788 F.2d 151 (3d Cir. 1986) (source of factors referenced in Fogerty)
- Ramirez v. Nichols, [citation="496 F. App'x 383"] (5th Cir.) (discusses routine nature of § 505 awards)