Previously, Ahab Joseph Nafal (“Nafal”) filed suit against Jay-Z and others in thecase entitled Ahab Joseph (“Julian”) Nafal v. Shawn Carter, et al., Case No. CV 05-2480SVW (PJWx) (C.D. Cal. 2005) (“Nafal Action”). Nafal asserted claims similar to thosealleged herein: that the song “Big Pimpin,’” and variations thereof, infringed Nafal’s co-ownership interest in an exclusive license to use the Egyptian musical composition,“Khosara, Khosara.” Defs.’ Req. Judicial Notice (“Defs.’ RJN”), Ex. 3 (“Aug. 3, 2007Order, Nafal Action”) at 44. Nafal claimed that he had acquired his interest in a license for“Khosara, Khosara” pursuant to a January 27, 2005 written agreement. Id. at 45.However, the Court determined that Nafal was in fact a non-exclusive licensee, notauthorized to prosecute an action against alleged infringers. Id. at 73. The court dismissedthe case, concluding that Nafal lacked standing to maintain the lawsuit. Id. at 73-74.
Pictures Corporation, Radical Media, Rob Bourdon Music, Roc-A-Fella Records LLC,Timbaland Productions Inc., UMG Recordings Inc., Universal Music and VideoDistribution Inc., and Warner Music Inc. Plaintiff alleges claims for copyrightinfringement under the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq. (claims one, twoand three) and for violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et seq. (claim four).
On March 19, 2008, the Court dismissed plaintiff’s fourth claim for relief pursuant toRule 12(b)(6). Plaintiff’s allegations stem from an alleged infringement of his copyrightinterest in the Egyptian musical composition, “Khosara, Khosara,” through theperformance, recording and transmittal of the song “Big Pimpin’” and its variations.On September 20, 2010, plaintiff filed the instant motion for partial summary judgment as to material facts and issues of law, including foreign law. On December 13,2010, defendants filed an opposition to plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment.On January 17, 2011, plaintiff filed a reply in support of his motion. On February 8,2011, defendants filed a sur-reply. On January 31, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion toexclude testimony of defendants’ expert Ahmed Y. Zohny. On February 7, 2011,defendants filed an opposition to plaintiff’s motion. On February 14, 2011, plaintiff filed a reply in support of his motion. On February 28, 2011, a hearing was held on both