- 1 -

MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28




H
O
L
M
E
S

W
E
I
N
B
E
R
G

P
C

3
0
7
6
5

P
a
c
i
f
i
c

C
o
a
s
t

H
i
g
h
w
a
y
,


S
u
i
t
e

4
1
1

M
a
l
i
b
u
,

C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a


9
0
2
6
5

STEVEN M. WEINBERG (SBN 235581)
smweinberg@holmesweinberg.com
MICHAEL J . SALVATORE (SBN 281118)
msalvatore@holmesweinberg.com
HOLMES WEINBERG, PC
30765 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 411
Malibu, California 90265
Tel: (310) 457-6100
Fax: (310) 457-9555

Attorneys for Plaintiff
Masterfile Corporation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MASTERFILE CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

CHAGA INTERNATIONAL, a Nevada
corporation; STEVE GOULD, an
individual; and MICHAEL TIDD, an
individual,

Defendants.

Case No. 12-CV-00850 R (Ex)


NOTICE OF MOTION AND
MOTION TO VACATE
JUDGMENT

Hearing Requested

Date: November 3, 2014
Time: 10:00 AM
Courtroom: 8

Hon. Manuel L. Real



Case 2:12-cv-00850-R-E Document 40 Filed 09/29/14 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:677

- 2 -
MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28




H
O
L
M
E
S

W
E
I
N
B
E
R
G

P
C

3
0
7
6
5

P
a
c
i
f
i
c

C
o
a
s
t

H
i
g
h
w
a
y
,


S
u
i
t
e

4
1
1

M
a
l
i
b
u
,

C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a


9
0
2
6
5


TO THE COURT, THE PARTIES, AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF
RECORD:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on November 3, 2014 at 10:00 a.m., or as
soon thereafter as counsel may be heard by the above-entitled Court, Plaintiff
Masterfile Corporation (Plaintiff or Masterfile) will and hereby does move for
an order vacating the judgment in this case.
This motion is based on this Notice of Motion and Motion and the
accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities, all pleadings and
submissions on file in this action, and upon such other matters as may be presented
to the Court at or before the time of the hearing.

Dated: September 29, 2014 /s/ Steven M. Weinberg
STEVEN M. WEINBERG
MICHAEL J . SALVATORE
HOLMES WEINBERG, PC
30765 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 411
Malibu, California 90265
Tel: (310) 457-6100
Fax: (310) 457-9555
Email: sweinberg@holmesweinberg.com
msalvatore@holmesweinberg.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff
Masterfile Corporation







Case 2:12-cv-00850-R-E Document 40 Filed 09/29/14 Page 2 of 5 Page ID #:678

- 3 -
MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28




H
O
L
M
E
S

W
E
I
N
B
E
R
G

P
C

3
0
7
6
5

P
a
c
i
f
i
c

C
o
a
s
t

H
i
g
h
w
a
y
,


S
u
i
t
e

4
1
1

M
a
l
i
b
u
,

C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a


9
0
2
6
5



MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On August 10, 2012, summary judgment (the J udgment) on this action
was entered in favor of Defendants Chaga International (Chaga), Steve Gould
(Gould), and Michael Tidd (Tidd) (collectively, Defendants) against
Plaintiff. [Dkt. 32]. The J udgment was based on the courts agreement with the
rationales in two cases that involved the same issue as that in this case the
registration of collections of photographs under a single US Copyright Office
registration number. Alaska Stock, LLC v. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Pub. Co.,
2010 WL 3785720 (D. Alaska Sept. 21, 2010); and Bean v. Houghton Mifflin
Harcourt Pub. Co., 2010 WL 3168624 (D. Ariz. Aug. 10, 2010) [Dkt. 33, at page
7, Conclusion of Law No. 9]. On March 18, 2014, the United States Court of
Appeals, Ninth Circuit, decided Alaska Stock, LLC v. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
Pub. Co., 747 F.3d 673 (9th Cir. 2014), rejecting the same rationale on which the
J udgment in this case was based, and accordingly reversing the Alaska Stock
district courts decision. . Plaintiff now brings this Motion respectfully requesting
that the J udgment be vacated in light of the Ninth Circuits decision in Alaska
Stock.
II. ARGUMENT
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5), the court may relieve a
party or its legal representative from a final judgment if it is based on an earlier
judgment that has been reversed or vacated. Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 60(b)(5). See
Voggenthaler v. Maryland Square LLC, 2013 WL 6328001 (D. Nevada Dec. 4,
2013) (vacating judgment in light of Ninth Circuit holding). FRCP 60(b)(5)
further states that: [a] motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable
time. Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 60(b)(5).
Case 2:12-cv-00850-R-E Document 40 Filed 09/29/14 Page 3 of 5 Page ID #:679

- 4 -
MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28




H
O
L
M
E
S

W
E
I
N
B
E
R
G

P
C

3
0
7
6
5

P
a
c
i
f
i
c

C
o
a
s
t

H
i
g
h
w
a
y
,


S
u
i
t
e

4
1
1

M
a
l
i
b
u
,

C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a


9
0
2
6
5

On March 18, 2014, the Ninth Circuit reversed the district courts decision
in the Alaska Stock case, stating with respect to the rationale on which summary
judgment in this action was based, that:
The stock agencies through their trade association worked out what they
should do to register images with the Register of Copyrights, the Copyright
Office established a clear procedure and the stock agencies followed it. The
Copyright Office has maintained its procedure for three decades, spanning
multiple administrations. The livelihoods of photographers and stock
agencies have long been founded on their compliance with the Registers
reasonable interpretation of the statute. Their reliance upon a reasonable and
longstanding administrative interpretation should be honored. Denying the
fruits of reliance by citizens on a longstanding administrative practice
reasonably construing a statute is unjust. Alaska Stock, 747 F.3d at 686.
In light of the fact that the Alaska Stock decision was reversed and remanded
to the District Court with the above instruction, the J udgment in this case is based
on a decision that has been reversed by the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuits
decision in Alaska Stock is binding on this Court. Further, Plaintiffs Motion to
Vacate J udgment has been brought within a reasonable time, less than one year
after the Ninth Circuits decision in Alaska Stock. Accordingly, Plaintiff
respectfully requests that for these reasons, the J udgment in this matter be vacated
in its entirety.
Defendants counsel Oscar Michelen has advised the undersigned counsel
for Plaintiff that because of certain complications relating to the estate of
Defendant Michael Tidd, now deceased, he lacks authority to stipulate to this
Motion on behalf of the Defendants, and will provide the Court with an
explanation relating to this issue.

III. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court
vacate its J udgment in this matter.
Case 2:12-cv-00850-R-E Document 40 Filed 09/29/14 Page 4 of 5 Page ID #:680

- 5 -
MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28




H
O
L
M
E
S

W
E
I
N
B
E
R
G

P
C

3
0
7
6
5

P
a
c
i
f
i
c

C
o
a
s
t

H
i
g
h
w
a
y
,


S
u
i
t
e

4
1
1

M
a
l
i
b
u
,

C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a


9
0
2
6
5


Respectfully submitted,
DATED: September 29, 2014 HOLMES WEINBERG, PC

By: /s/ Steven M. Weinberg
Steven M. Weinberg

Attorneys for Plaintiff
Masterfile Corporation
Case 2:12-cv-00850-R-E Document 40 Filed 09/29/14 Page 5 of 5 Page ID #:681