Strike 3 Holdings Loses Federal Appeal in 9th Circuit – Seattle, Washington

Strike 3 Holdings has been filing copyright infringement lawsuits for years that have impacted thousands of defendants. These cases can lead to serious consequences including steep fines and settlement amounts. While defendants do have options in these cases, they can still leave defendants feeling scared and unsure of the future that lies ahead.

Strike 3 Holdings recent loss in Washington

Strike 3 Holdings recently filed an appeal in Seattle, Washington. The official document states:

“Strike 3 Holdings, LLC appeals the district court’s award of attorney’s fees in favor of John Doe on Doe’s counterclaim for non-infringement. Strike 3 argues that Doe lacked standing to pursue his counterclaim because Strike 3 voluntarily dismissed its copyright infringement claim against Doe and could not renew that claim in the future. Strike 3 also contends that the district court abused its discretion by awarding fees under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 505, because the fee award did not further the Act’s essential goals. The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.”

In these cases, “The party seeking declaratory relief must demonstrate (1) a concrete and imminent injury, (2) that is causally connected to the defendant’s actions, (3) which could be redressed by a favorable decision.” In this appeal, Strike 3 challenged the first two requirements that John Doe cannot demonstrate concrete and imminent injury. With the existence of pending litigation between Strike 3 and the defendant and a possibility of future litigation between the two, this “constitutes the type of injury that confers constitutional standing.”

Strike 3 had voluntarily dismissed it’s infringement claims against John Doe, but this meant Doe needed to decide whether to pursue his non-infringement counterclaim or surrender to the claim in the hope that Strike 3 would not bring further action based on Doe’s prior alleged infringement, “and And while Strike 3 enjoyed the “absolute right” to dismiss its infringement claim under Federal Rule Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), Am. Soccer Co., Inc. v. Score First Enters., 187 F.3d 1108, 1110 (9th Cir. 1999), it did not have the absolute right to choose the consequences of its without-prejudice dismissal.” John Doe’s fear of potential prosecution was concrete and imminent.  Additionally, Strike 3’s oral argument admitted that it was not clear whether the accused infringer was the father or son living in the household.

Ultimately the court ruled in Doe’s favor stating:

“The district court limited its analysis of the Fogerty factors to compensation and deterrence, ultimately concluding that compensating Doe for litigating a meritorious copyright defense sufficiently advanced the goals of the Copyright Act. We admit that the district court’s analysis of the Fogerty factors could have been more robust as it merely considered the factors it deemed relevant and applied them to this case. But the factors are, by definition, non-exclusive, Fogerty, 510 U.S. at 534 n.19, and the district court was not required to discuss each one in depth. Thus, we are not left with “a definite and firm conviction” that the district court erred. Wall Data Inc. v. Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Dept., 447 F.3d 769, 787 (9th Cir. 2006).”

Watch the video here:

What to do if you’re a target in a Strike 3 Holdings lawsuit

If you’re a target in a Strike 3 Holdings lawsuit, contact an attorney who is experienced with copyright infringement to discuss your options. The attorneys at Antonelli Law have handled thousands of copyright infringement cases and can represent clients across the nation. We offer free consultations and can discuss your options with you today.

To schedule a consultation with Antonelli Law for free and discuss your Strike 3 Holdings lawsuit call 312-201-8310 or click here.

This is a blog dedicated to updates on copyright infringement cases. We’ve represented over 700 Strike 3 Holdings clients across the US since 2017, and are America’s most experienced BT copyright defense firm; we can represent you in your case. For more information about handling your subpoena visit our main website page for Strike 3 Holdings