839 F. Supp. 2d 49
D.D.C.2012Background
- Pro se plaintiff Isaac A. Potter, Jr. sues Toei Animation Incorporated and the United States over alleged copyright/trademark rights in Zodiac Knights 2000.
- Complaint is largely incomprehensible; Defendants move to dismiss for failure to state a claim and other defenses.
- Plaintiff has previously filed at least eleven federal actions concerning the same copyright/trademark claims.
- Court concludes Plaintiff cannot establish ownership/validity or infringement; claims fail on merits and are precluded in part by prior litigation.
- Toei’s Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal is granted; United States’ Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal is granted; case is dismissed with prejudice.
- Court notes Plaintiff’s numerous related motions are moot in light of dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Toei’s motion to dismiss states a claim | Potter argues rights exist and infringement occurred by Toei and others. | Toei contends the complaint fails to plead valid trademark/copyright claims or proper statute violations. | Toei's motion granted; claims insufficient to state a claim. |
| Whether Tariff Act/337 claims are cognizable in district court | Seeks Tariff Act relief for 337 violations against defendants. | No private right of action in Tariff Act section 337 in district court. | Dismissed; ITC pathway required. |
| Whether 18 U.S.C. § 1001 claims are cognizable civilly | Alleges a civil right under § 1001 for federal wrongdoing. | § 1001 provides no private civil right of action. | Dismissed; no private civil action under § 1001. |
| Whether issue preclusion/claim preclusion bars relief against the United States | Alleges ongoing infringement despite prior filings. | Prior federal court decisions preclude relief; claim preclusion applies. | Claim preclusion applies; United States claims dismissed with prejudice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for pleading claims)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility standard; factual content required)
- Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (2007) (liberal pleading standard for pro se plaintiffs)
- Sparrow v. United Air Lines, Inc., 216 F.3d 1111 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (treats pleadings with reasonable inferences for motion practice)
- Dura Pharm., Inc. v. Broudo, 544 U.S. 336 (2005) (requires pleading of material facts to support claim)
- Martin v. DOJ, 488 F.3d 446 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (elements of issue preclusion in preclusion analysis)
- NRDC v. EPA, 513 F.3d 257 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (claim preclusion framework and nucleus of facts)
- Apotex, Inc. v. FDA, 393 F.3d 210 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (same nucleus of facts for preclusion analysis)
- Potter v. United States, 424 Fed. Appx. 941 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (affirmed precluded copyright claims in prior action)
- Johns v. Rozet, 770 F. Supp. 11 (D.D.C. 1991) (penalty dismissals and preclusion considerations)
- Potter v. Cartoon Network, No. 06-cv-2076 (N.D. Ga. 2008) (court-dismissal for lack of prosecution; issue preclusion discussion)