Case Against Authors, Filmmakers, and Institutions of Higher Learning Dismissed
We reported on Baker Jr. v. Hannah-Jones et al. on January 6, 2025. This case was relatively short-lived, ending in a sua sponte dismissal. A sua sponte dismissal occurs when a court dismisses a case on its own initiative, without a request from the defendants. The court identified several shortcomings in Baker’s complaint that warranted such action.
In a Memorandum Opinion and Order to Show Cause, the court warned Baker that his claims were potentially barred by the statute of limitations, since some, if not all, of the alleged infringements occurred before 2021, when the limitations period would have been triggered.
In addition, Judge Furman stated that the complaint would likely fail to state a claim because the allegations were based on elements that courts had already deemed unprotectable, such as Baker’s “rhythmic prose and tedious talk” style. He further explained that even if such elements were protected by copyright law, they would still be insufficient to sustain a claim because the plot, themes, and pacing of the defendants’ works were substantially different from Baker’s.
Judge Furman also found the allegations against the other 95 defendants to be factually deficient, failing to connect them to the infringing conduct alleged.
Under the rules of civil procedure, courts must first give plaintiffs notice before dismissing a case on a sua sponte basis. Accordingly, after issuing the Order to Show Cause, the court set January 9, 2025, as the deadline for Baker to respond in a memorandum of law. Since Baker failed to file a response by that date, the court had to officially issue the dismissal and it did so on January 15, 2025. The court followed up the dismissal the next day with a Memorandum Opinion and Order explaining the appropriateness of the dismissal.
Baker filed a Motion for Reconsideration, which was denied, and later filed a Notice of Appeal.