Conrad v. Latido Mitu Holdings LLC

OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Vicki Conrad, John Dlugolecki and Contact Press Images, Inc. (“CPI”) bring claims against defendants Latido Mitu Holdings, LLC (“LMH”), GoDigital Media Group (“GDMG”) and Mitu, Inc. under the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. §101 et seq. (the “Copyright Act”), alleging willful infringement of plaintiffs’ registered copyrights. LMH and GDMG now move to dismiss the case for lack of personal jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(2), Fed. R. Civ. P., and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under Rule 12(b)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P. In the alternative, LMH and GDMG move for a transfer of venue to the Central District of California under 28 U.S.C. §1404(a). For the reasons explained, the Court will grant the motion to transfer the action to the Central District of California. BACKGROUND According to the Amended Complaint, plaintiffs Conrad and Dlugolecki are photographers who are the creators and duly registered copyright owners of certain photos of Meghan Markle taken around December 1997 and December 1998 (the “Markle Photos”). (Doc 13 (Am. Compl.)

14-17; Id. Ex. A-D.) In the late 1990s, Dlugolecki, as a professional photographer with an ongoing business relationship with Immaculate Heart High School (“IHHS”) in Los Angeles, created photographs for the school’s yearbooks that included images of Ms. Markle, who was an IHHS student at that time. (Id. 5.) Dlugolecki is the copyright owner of these photos. (Id.) Conrad, a non-professional photographer, often accompanied Dlugolecki, her husband, on these photoshoots for IHHS and created photos of her own, of which she is the copyright owner. (Id. 4.) Plaintiff CPI is a New York corporation based in New York City,¹ and is the exclusive agency for Conrad’s and Dlugolecki’s photos at issue.² (Id. 6.) Plaintiffs allege that in March 2020, LMH and GDMG acquired the website wearemitu.com from Mitu, Inc. and operated the website in December 2020, when it prominently reproduced and displayed the Markle Photos without the plaintiffs’ knowledge or authorization or any legal right or license to do so. (Id.