Case No.: 5:10-CV-05022-LHKORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PARTSECOND SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE
U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t
F o r t h e N o r t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f C a l i f o r n i a
California’s “anti-SLAPP statute,”
ECF No. 135 (“MTS”). The Court held a hearing on thesemotions on January 12, 2012. Having considered the parties’ submissions and argument and therelevant law, and for the reasons explained below, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion forsummary judgment on the copyright infringement claim, GRANTS Defendants’ second specialmotion to strike the trade secrets misappropriation claim as to Defendant Klim, and DENIESDefendants’ second special motion to strike the trade secrets misappropriation claim as toDefendant Skywalker.
Art of Living Foundation
The Art of Living Foundation (“AOLF”), founded in 1981 by “His Holiness Sri Sri RaviShankar” (“Shankar”), is an international nonprofit educational and humanitarian organizationbased in Bangalore, India, with chapters in more than 140 countries.
First Am. Compl., ECF No.85 (“FAC”), ¶¶ 1, 17, 22, 24. Plaintiff here, also called Art of Living Foundation (“Plaintiff” or“AOLF-US”), is the United States chapter of AOLF and is a California non-profit corporationbased in Goleta, California. FAC ¶¶ 2, 12; Decl. of Ashwani Dhall in Opp’n to Defs.’ Mot. toDismiss, ECF No. 40 (“Dhall Decl.”), ¶¶ 9, 11, 13.All AOLF chapters, including Plaintiff AOLF-US, are dedicated to teaching the wellnessand spiritual lessons of Shankar. FAC ¶ 31; Dhall Decl. ¶¶ 9, 13. Plaintiff offers courses onbreathing, meditation, and yoga, focusing on “Sudarshan Kriya,” a rhythmic breathing technique.Dhall Decl. ¶¶ 14-15. One such course is called the “Art of Living Course,” which teaches thebasics of Sudarshan Kriya. Dhall Decl. ¶ 18. The fee for the Art of Living Course is typically
California’s anti-SLAPP statute provides a vehicle for dismissal of a “Strategic Lawsuit AgainstPublic Participation,” that is, a lawsuit brought to chill protected expression.
All parties have filed evidentiary objections to the declarations submitted in support of or inopposition to Defendants’ pending motions. To the extent the Court has considered evidencecontained in the declarations, it has ruled on the objections to that evidence and noted its rulings inthis Order. To the extent evidence contained in the declarations is not mentioned in this Order, ithas not been considered by the Court, and no ruling on the objections is required.
For clarity, the Court refers to the founding branch of the Art of Living Foundation, still based inBangalore, India, as “AOLF-India.”
Case5:10-cv-05022-LHK Document162 Filed05/01/12 Page2 of 39