Brown v. Does 1-20

United States District Court for the Western District of Washington · August 18, 2025 · No. 3:25-cv-05256-LK

Summary

This federal district court order dismisses a copyright infringement complaint sua sponte due to the plaintiff's failure to establish standing. The court determined that the purported copyright registrations attached to the amended complaint could not be verified in the official Copyright Office database, raising doubts about the plaintiff's ownership of the alleged works. While granting the plaintiff one final opportunity to amend within 21 days to concretely demonstrate copyright ownership, the court denied his renewed motion for early discovery as moot.

Court
United States District Court for the Western District of Washington
Writing for the Court
Lauren King
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Western District of Washington
Decision date
August 18, 2025
Docket number
3:25-cv-05256-LK
Procedural posture
Motion to dismiss for lack of subject‑matter jurisdiction and standing; complaint dismissed and motion for early discovery denied.
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

copyright infringementstandingsubject matter jurisdictionmotions to dismisscivil procedure

Practice areas

intellectual propertycivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court has subject‑matter jurisdiction over Brown's copyright infringement claims given his lack of standing.

Holdings

  1. The court lacks subject‑matter jurisdiction because Brown has failed to establish standing; the complaint is dismissed.

Key quotations

Because Mr. Brown has failed to establish standing, the Court DISMISSES his complaint but grants him one final opportunity to amend to concretely demonstrate that he holds the copyright for each of the relevant works. (at 12)

Factual background

Plaintiff Patrick Brown alleged that unknown defendants (Does 1‑20) infringed his copyrighted works and attached twenty certificates of registration for 376 works. The court could not locate any of the alleged registrations in the Copyright Office public records, raising doubts about Brown's ownership and standing.

Procedural history

The court denied Brown's motion for early discovery on May 19, 2024, finding lack of standing. Brown filed an amended complaint on June 6, 2025, attaching certificates of registration. The court again could not locate any registrations and determined it lacked subject‑matter jurisdiction, dismissing the complaint and denying the renewed discovery motion.

Remand instructions

The amended complaint must be filed within 21 days of the date of this Order.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…