The action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
The Court previously determined that MMAS is not the owner of the Morisky Widget copyright. (Prior Order at 8). The Court reasoned that MMAS had assigned “the Morisky Widget and any related copyright” to Dr. Morisky in a written settlement agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) stemming from a separate action. (Prior Order at 6 (citing RJN (Docket No. 37-5), Ex. A (Settlement Agreement) § II.1). The Settlement Agreement also provided that “MMAS Research, LLC will forego any claims it has to and will acknowledge that Donald Morisky is the sole and exclusive owner of the federal copyrights in and to the MMAS-4 and the MMAS-8, together with any related trademarks, copyrights, derivatives to the same or other intellectual property rights associated with the Morisky Medication Adherence scales or protocols.” (Id.). The Court further noted that while the Settlement Agreement permitted Plaintiff to use the copyright to settle existing claims listed in Exhibit 3 of the agreement, claims involving Defendants did not appear on the list. (Id.).
The Court is not persuaded by Trubow’s reasoning. While the defined term “Claim Settlements” does not stop Dr. Morisky from joining and authorizing additional actions, it does limit Trubow’s ability to pursue claim settlements without further authorization from Dr. Morisky. Dr. Morisky did not join this action or otherwise authorize Trubow to pursue the present claim against Defendants. (See Request for Dismissal with Prejudice of Dr. Donald E Morisky (Docket No. 48)).
The Court determines that Trubow does not have the standing to sue for copyright infringement of the Morisky Widget copyright and therefore has not met its burden of proving that the claim should be in federal court. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Motion to dismiss the copyright claim for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.