Scribd

Case No. 16-15469

I

N THE

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

NARUTO,

A

C

RESTED

M

ACAQUE

,

BY AND THROUGH HIS

N

EXT

F

RIENDS

, P

EOPLE FOR THE

E

THICAL

T

REATMENT OF

A

NIMALS

,

I

NC

., P

LAINTIFF

-A

PPELLANT

,

––v.–– DAVID

JOHN

SLATER,

WILDLIFE

PERSONALITIES,

LTD.,

AND

BLURB,

INC., D

EFENDANTS

-A

PPELLEES

,

––––––––

A

PPEAL FROM THE

U

NITED

S

TATES

D

ISTRICT

C

OURT

FOR THE

N

ORTHERN

D

ISTRICT OF

C

ALIFORNIA IN

C

ASE

N

O

.

3:15-

CV

-04324, U.S.

D

ISTRICT

J

UDGE

W

ILLIAM

H.

O

RRICK

III

BRIEF

OF

DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES

DAVID

JOHN

SLATER AND

WILDLIFE

PERSONALITIES,

LTD.

ANDREW J. DHUEY 456 Boynton Avenue Berkeley, California 94707 (510) 528-8200 Attorney for Defendants-Appellees, David John Slater and Wildlife Personalities, Ltd. 25 August 2016

Case: 16-15469, 08/25/2016, ID: 10101512, DktEntry: 26, Page 1 of 36

~ i ~

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

Pursuant to Rule 26.2 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Defendant-Appellee Wildlife Personalities, Ltd., certifies that it is a private corporation that has no affiliation with any other corporation. It has no parent corporation, and no publicly-held corporation owns 10% or more of its stock.


~ ii ~

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ............................................... i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ......................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION .............................................................. 2 COUNTERSTATEMENT OF THE ISSUES ................................................ 3 STATEMENT OF THE RELEVANT FACT ................................................ 3 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ...................................................................... 4 ARGUMENT: I. The Court Should Affirm the District Court’s Judgment of Dismissal for Lack of Standing .. ............................................... 5 A. Non-human Animals Lack Standing to Sue for Copyright Infringement... ................................................ 5 B. PETA Is Ineligible to Serve as Naruto’s “Next Friend”... .......................................................................... 8 II. The Court Should Order PETA to Pay Slater’s Attorney Fees on Appeal.. ....................................................................... 11 A. The Court Should Address Slater’s Request for Fees on Appeal in Its Merits Decision... ................................ 11 B. Slater Is a “Prevailing Party” under Section 505. .......... 12 C. All of the Applicable Factors Favor Awarding Slater Recovery of His Attorney Fees on Appeal... ................. 14
