{"cached_at":"2026-09-04T09:48:29.997093+00:00","cl_docket_id":"72185144","docket":{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","id":72185144,"court":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/courts/cacd/","court_id":"cacd","original_court_info":null,"idb_data":null,"clusters":[],"audio_files":[],"assigned_to":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/people/282/","referred_to":null,"bankruptcy_information":null,"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-01-23T17:54:54.483579-08:00","date_modified":"2026-09-02T19:05:06.930841-07:00","source":1,"appeal_from_str":"","assigned_to_str":"Andre Birotte Jr.","referred_to_str":"Michael B. Kaufman","panel_str":"","date_last_index":null,"date_cert_granted":null,"date_cert_denied":null,"date_argued":null,"date_reargued":null,"date_reargument_denied":null,"date_filed":"2026-01-23","date_terminated":null,"date_last_filing":"2026-09-02","case_name_short":"","case_name":"Ted Entertainment, Inc. v. Snap Inc.","case_name_full":"","slug":"ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc","docket_number":"2:26-cv-00754","docket_number_core":"2600754","docket_number_raw":"2:26-cv-00754","docket_number_source":0,"federal_dn_office_code":"2","federal_dn_case_type":"cv","federal_dn_judge_initials_assigned":"AB","federal_dn_judge_initials_referred":"MBK","federal_defendant_number":null,"pacer_case_id":"1003845","cause":"17:101 Copyright Infringement","nature_of_suit":"820 Copyright","jury_demand":"Plaintiff","jurisdiction_type":"Federal Question","appellate_fee_status":"","appellate_case_type_information":"","mdl_status":"","filepath_ia":"","filepath_ia_json":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"ia_needs_upload":true,"ia_date_first_change":"2026-01-23T17:54:54.475933-08:00","date_blocked":null,"blocked":false,"appeal_from":null,"parent_docket":null,"tags":[],"panel":[]},"parties":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/19648285/","id":19648285,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13498764/","attorney_id":13498764,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13498764/","attorney_id":13498764,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740802/","attorney_id":13740802,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740803/","attorney_id":13740803,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740804/","attorney_id":13740804,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740804/","attorney_id":13740804,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740805/","attorney_id":13740805,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"name":"Plaintiff","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2026-04-21T16:35:50.231062-07:00","date_modified":"2026-04-21T16:35:50.231071-07:00","name":"Nicole Chmura","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/17413302/","id":17413302,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11216016/","attorney_id":11216016,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11216016/","attorney_id":11216016,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740801/","attorney_id":13740801,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740801/","attorney_id":13740801,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342101/","attorney_id":11342101,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342101/","attorney_id":11342101,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342102/","attorney_id":11342102,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342102/","attorney_id":11342102,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342103/","attorney_id":11342103,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342103/","attorney_id":11342103,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740802/","attorney_id":13740802,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740803/","attorney_id":13740803,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740804/","attorney_id":13740804,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740804/","attorney_id":13740804,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740805/","attorney_id":13740805,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342104/","attorney_id":11342104,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342104/","attorney_id":11342104,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13498764/","attorney_id":13498764,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"name":"Plaintiff","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2026-03-03T06:31:39.803664-08:00","date_modified":"2026-03-03T06:31:39.803680-08:00","name":"Ted Entertainment, Inc.","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/17205515/","id":17205515,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342105/","attorney_id":11342105,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13529955/","attorney_id":13529955,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342106/","attorney_id":11342106,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13872448/","attorney_id":13872448,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342107/","attorney_id":11342107,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342108/","attorney_id":11342108,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13498765/","attorney_id":13498765,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2026-01-27T03:49:19.601415-08:00","date_modified":"2026-01-27T03:49:19.601427-08:00","name":"Snap Inc.","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/17205514/","id":17205514,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11216016/","attorney_id":11216016,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11216016/","attorney_id":11216016,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342101/","attorney_id":11342101,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342101/","attorney_id":11342101,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342102/","attorney_id":11342102,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342102/","attorney_id":11342102,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342103/","attorney_id":11342103,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342103/","attorney_id":11342103,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740802/","attorney_id":13740802,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740803/","attorney_id":13740803,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740804/","attorney_id":13740804,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740804/","attorney_id":13740804,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740805/","attorney_id":13740805,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342104/","attorney_id":11342104,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342104/","attorney_id":11342104,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13498764/","attorney_id":13498764,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"name":"Plaintiff","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"each individually and on behalf of all others simiarly situated","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2026-01-27T03:49:19.553174-08:00","date_modified":"2026-01-27T03:49:19.553192-08:00","name":"Golfholics, Inc.","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/17205513/","id":17205513,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11216016/","attorney_id":11216016,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11216016/","attorney_id":11216016,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342101/","attorney_id":11342101,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342101/","attorney_id":11342101,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342102/","attorney_id":11342102,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342102/","attorney_id":11342102,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342103/","attorney_id":11342103,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342103/","attorney_id":11342103,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740802/","attorney_id":13740802,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740803/","attorney_id":13740803,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740804/","attorney_id":13740804,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740804/","attorney_id":13740804,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13740805/","attorney_id":13740805,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342104/","attorney_id":11342104,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/11342104/","attorney_id":11342104,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/13498764/","attorney_id":13498764,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","docket_id":72185144,"name":"Plaintiff","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"each individually and on behalf of all others simiarly situated","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2026-01-27T03:49:19.471596-08:00","date_modified":"2026-01-27T03:49:19.471610-08:00","name":"Matt Fisher","extra_info":""}],"entries":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/476756177/","id":476756177,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/492328620/","id":492328620,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/72/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-09-02T19:05:07.042610-07:00","date_modified":"2026-09-02T19:05:07.052444-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"72","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048777103","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Answer to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening)","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-09-02T19:05:07.020276-07:00","date_modified":"2026-09-02T19:05:07.026493-07:00","date_filed":"2026-09-02","time_filed":"18:44:12","entry_number":72,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-09-02.001","pacer_sequence_number":257,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/476193835/","id":476193835,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/491749851/","id":491749851,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/71/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-08-28T11:35:54.519878-07:00","date_modified":"2026-09-02T12:32:56.067375-07:00","sha1":"9ad200e783ecba7e087798d0b27cb13724042e13","page_count":2,"file_size":2911561,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.1003845/gov.uscourts.cacd.1003845.71.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"Case 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK   Document 71   Filed 08/28/26   Page 1 of 2 Page ID\n                                  #:466\n\fCase 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK   Document 71   Filed 08/28/26   Page 2 of 2 Page ID\n                                  #:467\n\f","ocr_status":1,"date_upload":"2026-09-02T12:32:55.930790-07:00","document_number":"71","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048730991","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":false,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123)","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-08-28T11:35:54.498508-07:00","date_modified":"2026-09-02T12:32:50.226601-07:00","date_filed":"2026-08-28","time_filed":"11:25:42","entry_number":71,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-08-28.001","pacer_sequence_number":255,"description":"Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Aditya Vijay Kamdar counsel for Defendant Snap Inc.. Aditya V. Kamdar is no longer counsel of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Defendant Snap Inc.. (Kamdar, Aditya) (Entered: 08/28/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/475279798/","id":475279798,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/490807298/","id":490807298,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/69/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-08-20T17:59:23.100283-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:23.115649-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"69","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-08-20T17:59:23.067394-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.457520-07:00","date_filed":"2026-08-13","time_filed":null,"entry_number":69,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-08-13.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"ORDER by Judge Andre Birotte Jr: granting 68 Non-Resident Attorney Justin A. Nelson APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiffs Nicole Chmura, Matt Fisher, Golfholics, Inc., Ted Entertainment, Inc., designating Rohit D. Nath as local counsel. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY (sbou) (Entered: 08/13/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/475125621/","id":475125621,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/490647508/","id":490647508,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/70/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-08-19T19:01:58.897511-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-24T07:03:37.778447-07:00","sha1":"3dfc4c8d740c919b60164e067394baf5e48c01a4","page_count":17,"file_size":196809,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.1003845/gov.uscourts.cacd.1003845.70.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cacd.1003845/gov.uscourts.cacd.1003845.70.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":"recap-thumbnails/gov.uscourts.cacd.1003845/490647508.thumb.1068.png","thumbnail_status":1,"plain_text":" Case 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK       Document 70 Filed 08/19/26       Page 1 of 17 Page ID\n                                        #:449\n\n\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n9                          CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA\n10    TED ENTERTAINMENT, INC. MATT                  Case No. 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK\n      FISHER, GOLFHOLICS INC., AND\n11    NICOLE CHMURA, each individually              ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT\u2019S\n      and on behalf of all others similarly         MOTION TO DISMISS [DKT. NO.\n12    situated,                                     42]\n13                              Plaintiffs,\n14             v.\n15    SNAP, INC.,\n16                              Defendants.\n17\n18\n           Before the Court is Defendant Snap Inc.\u2019s (\u201cDefendant\u201d or \u201cSnap Inc.\u201d) Motion\n19\n20   to Dismiss the Consolidated Class Action Complaint (\u201cCAC,\u201d Dkt. No. 36). \u201cMot.,\u201d\n\n21   Dkt. No. 42. Plaintiffs Ted Entertainment, Inc., Matt Fisher, Golfholics, Inc., and Nicole\n22\n     Chmura (collectively \u201cPlaintiffs\u201d) filed a timely Opposition (\u201cOpp\u2019n,\u201d 50) and\n23\n24   Defendant filed a Reply (\u201cReply,\u201d Dkt. No. 55). The Court held a hearing on the matter\n\n25   on June 26, 2026. For the following reasons, the Motion is DENIED.\n26\n                                      I.      BACKGROUND\n27\n28         Plaintiffs are content creators who upload and share videos on YouTube for\n\n                                                1\n\f Case 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK       Document 70 Filed 08/19/26    Page 2 of 17 Page ID\n                                        #:450\n\n\n1    public viewing. CAC \u00b6\u00b6 17-24. Plaintiffs exclusively upload their original videos to\n2\n     YouTube for public viewing in a manner consistent with YouTube\u2019s Terms of Service.\n3\n4    Id.\u00b6\u00b6 18, 21, 23 & 25. Under YouTube\u2019s Terms of Service, Plaintiffs and other content\n\n5    creators grant YouTube and other users of YouTube to access content through\n6\n     YouTube\u2019s services. Id. \u00b6 67. The license however \u201cdoes not grant any rights or\n7\n8    permissions for a user to make use of [the] Content independent of the [YouTube]\n9    Service.\u201d Id.\n10\n     Plaintiffs allege the following:\n11\n12         A. YouTube and the Technological Protection Measures (\u201cTPMs\u201d)\n13         YouTube is a video-sharing platform that permits individuals to upload\n14\n     audiovisual content for public access. Id. \u00b6\u00b6 32, 34. The \u201cwork\u201d at issue includes its\n15\n16   digital embodiment through \u201cencoded media streams and associated data structures.\u201d\n17   Id. \u00b6 33. YouTube permits users to watch and listen to videos for free through its\n18\n     advertisement-supported service, with access limited to its authorized playback\n19\n20   environment. Id. \u00b6\u00b6 34, 37. Rather than providing videos in their native or fixed file\n21   form or allowing file-level access, id. \u00b6\u00b6 38\u201339, YouTube delivers each video in\n22\n     segments through temporary links and reassembles those segments for playback\n23\n24   through its authorized streaming mechanism. Id. \u00b6 42.\n25\n           To ensure that users access the uploaded content only through the authorized\n26\n     streaming mechanism, YouTube uses five TPMs to control access to content and\n27\n28   monitor its delivery system: (1) the rolling cipher; (2) IP-based blocking and rate\n\n                                              2\n\f Case 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK       Document 70 Filed 08/19/26        Page 3 of 17 Page ID\n                                        #:451\n\n\n1    limiting; (3) short-lived session-bound streaming URLs; (4) CAPTCHA human-\n2\n     verification challenges; and (5) proof-of-origin tokens. Id. \u00b6 45. Each of these\n3\n4    mechanisms independently protects and controls access to the uploaded works.\n\n5                 a. The Rolling Cipher\n6\n           The rolling cipher is an encryption that protects access to the audiovisual file. Id.\n7\n8    \u00b6 50. Each YouTube video URL includes two URLS: the page URL, which is visible to\n9    the user, and the file URL, which is not visible to the user. Id. \u00b6 51. The file URL is the\n10\n     video file itself played within the page and it is encrypted using a complex and\n11\n12   periodically changing algorithm, or the rolling cipher, designed to \u201cimpede external\n13   access to the underlying YouTube files.\u201d Id.\n14\n           YouTube uses a proprietary logic embedded in the official YouTube player to\n15\n16   decrypt authentication requests and deliver the content. Id. \u00b6\u00b6 50, 51. Thus, the rolling\n17   cipher serves as a \u201cdigital lock,\u201d controlling access to the audiovisual content and\n18\n     protecting against unauthorized downloads. Id. \u00b6 51. YouTube\u2019s streaming architecture\n19\n20   serves as the key, permitting users to view content through YouTube\u2019s authorized\n21   playback environment. Id. \u00b6 51.\n22\n                  b. IP Blocking and Rate Limiting\n23\n24         YouTube restricts access to suspicious users through IP-based blocking and rate\n25\n     limiting. YouTube monitors network behavior and restricts access when it detects\n26\n     excessive or abusive behavior. Id. \u00b6 53. Once certain thresholds are exceeded, YouTube\n27\n28   blocks the IP address from accessing the platform entirely. Id.\n                                                3\n\f Case 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK      Document 70 Filed 08/19/26       Page 4 of 17 Page ID\n                                       #:452\n\n\n1                 c. Session-Bound, Short-Lived URLs\n2\n           YouTube limits access to works by using session-bound, short-lived URLs.\n3\n4    When YouTube creates a file URL for uploaded content, the URL itself protects the\n\n5    work because it is \u201ctemporary, cryptographically signed, and tied to a particular\n6\n     playback session and client context.\u201d Id. \u00b6 56. In other words, these file URLs are\n7\n8    \u201csession-bound\u201d because they provide a user with temporary access, limited to a\n9    particular use session. Session-bound URLs expire automatically, such that an attempt\n10\n     to access the content using an expired link will be unsuccessful. Id. \u00b6 57. Re-accessing\n11\n12   content requires obtaining fresh authorization parameters and regenerating new valid\n13   URLs. Id.\n14\n                  d. CAPTCHA Challenges\n15\n16         YouTube uses CAPTCHA challenges to monitor access and ensure that it is\n17   limited to human users, rather than automated bots. When traffic activity and patterns\n18\n     indicate suspicious or automated activity, YouTube requires completion of a\n19\n20   CAPTCHA challenge, a test required to separate human users from bots. Id. \u00b6 58.\n21   Plaintiffs allege that these CAPTCHA challenges serve a gatekeeping function by\n22\n     preventing certain users from accessing the platform. Id.\n23\n24                e. Proof of Origin Tokens\n25\n           Finally, YouTube uses \u201cproof of origin\u201d tokens to ensure that requests for videos\n26\n     are valid. YouTube requires all requests for video segments include cryptographic\n27\n28   \u201cproof-of origin\u201d tokens that validate a request as originating from an authorized\n\n                                               4\n\f Case 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK       Document 70 Filed 08/19/26       Page 5 of 17 Page ID\n                                        #:453\n\n\n1    YouTube playback environment. Id. \u00b6 62. Requests that do not possess a valid token or\n2\n     that possess an expired token are refused. Id. Proof of origin tokens are generated\n3\n4    exclusively within YouTube\u2019s authorized player environment, so software operating\n\n5    outside that environment cannot obtain valid tokens through ordinary means. Id.\n6\n            B. Defendant\u2019s Alleged Scraping of YouTube Videos\n7\n8           Defendant Snap Inc. is a Delaware corporation that allegedly circumvented the\n9    TPMs to access and scrape millions of videos from YouTube to feed, train, improve,\n10\n     and commercialize Defendant\u2019s large-scale commercial generative text-to-video\n11\n12   artificial intelligence (\u201cAI\u201d) models (collectively \u201cSnap AI Video\u201d). Id. \u00b6\u00b6 1, 77.\n13   Defendant had significant incentives to acquire data to train its Snap AI Video at scale.\n14\n     Id. \u00b6 78. Rather than seek permission for use of the content or negotiate lawful licenses,\n15\n16   Defendant broke through YouTube\u2019s access protections to obtain the underlying files.\n17   Id. \u00b6 9, 78.\n18\n            Defendant used the publicly available HD-VILA-100M dataset, which was\n19\n20   compiled by Microsoft Research Asia from millions of YouTube videos. Id. \u00b6 80. HD-\n21   VILA-100M consists not of the actual video files but of data points to identify different\n22\n     YouTube videos, such as URLs, video identifiers, and timestamps. Id. \u00b6 81. In short,\n23\n24   HD-VILA-100M is an index file. The dataset is composed of roughly 100 million clips\n25\n     derived from 3,098,462 YouTube videos. Id. \u00b6 84. HD-VILA-100M was published was\n26\n     for use in a non-commercial research setting, stating that users \u201cmay not use the Data\n27\n28   or any Results in any commercial offering, including as part of a product or service (or\n\n                                                5\n\f Case 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK        Document 70 Filed 08/19/26         Page 6 of 17 Page ID\n                                         #:454\n\n\n1    to improve any product or service) you use or provide to others.\u201d Id. \u00b6 85.\n2\n           Using HD-VILA-100M, Defendant\u2019s researchers developed the Panda-70M\n3\n4    dataset. They created Panda-70M by curating 3.8 million high-resolution videos from\n\n5    HD-VILA-100M and splitting them into 70.8 million video clips. Id. \u00b6 89. Like HD-\n6\n     VILA-100M, Panda-70M is an index file that does not contain the actual audiovisual\n7\n8    files, but instead contains location identifiers. Id. \u00b6 91. Indexes to Plaintiffs\u2019 videos were\n9    found in either the HD-VILA-100M dataset or Panda-70M dataset. Id. \u00b6\u00b6 17, 20, 22,\n10\n     24.\n11\n12         Plaintiffs allege that Defendant used the Panda-70M dataset to unlawfully scrape\n13   videos from YouTube. By scraping the content, Defendant used an automated process\n14\n     to access and download the audio and video files directly from the website\u2019s servers\n15\n16   rather than viewing the content through the authorized playback environment. Id. \u00b6 95.\n17   Defendant used scraping tools and/or workflows to bypass or evade YouTube\u2019s TPMs\n18\n     and then reproduced the videos to train Defendant\u2019s AI. Id. \u00b6\u00b6 48-49; 99 - 113.\n19\n20         In using these tools, Plaintiffs allege that Defendant was able to bulk extract,\n21   access, and download YouTube videos at scale through automation, a process known\n22\n     as \u201cscraping\u201d or \u201cstream ripping.\u201d Id. \u00b6 95.\n23\n24         Plaintiffs brought this putative class action against Defendant alleging violations\n25\n     of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (\u201cDMCA\u201d) anti-circumvention provision, or\n26\n     17 U.S.C. \u00a7 1201(a). Id. \u00b6\u00b6 145-161. Plaintiffs seek statutory damages, equitable relief,\n27\n28   and any other just relief. Id. at 37-38. Defendant moves the dismiss the action under\n\n                                                  6\n\f Case 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK       Document 70 Filed 08/19/26       Page 7 of 17 Page ID\n                                        #:455\n\n\n1    Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).\n2\n                                    II.   LEGAL STANDARD\n3\n4          Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (\u201cRule\u201d) 8 requires a plaintiff to present a \u201cshort\n\n5    and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.\u201d Fed. R.\n6\n     Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Under Rule 12(b)(6), a defendant may move to dismiss a complaint for\n7\n8    \u201cfailure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.\u201d Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). To\n9    defeat a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, the complaint must provide enough detail to\n10\n     \u201cgive the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it\n11\n12   rests.\u201d Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). The complaint must also\n13   be \u201cplausible on its face,\u201d allowing the court to \u201cdraw the reasonable inference that the\n14\n     defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.\u201d Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678\n15\n16   (2009). \u201cThe plausibility standard is not akin to a \u2018probability requirement,\u2019 but it asks\n17   for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully.\u201d Id. Labels,\n18\n     conclusions, and \u201ca formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not\n19\n20   do.\u201d Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555.\n21         A complaint may be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) for the lack of a cognizable\n22\n     legal theory or the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory.\n23\n24   Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep\u2019t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988). When ruling on\n25\n     a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, \u201ca judge must accept as true all of the factual allegations\n26\n     contained in the complaint.\u201d Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007). But a court is\n27\n28   \u201cnot bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation.\u201d Iqbal,\n\n                                                 7\n\f Case 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK        Document 70 Filed 08/19/26        Page 8 of 17 Page ID\n                                         #:456\n\n\n1    556 U.S. at 678 (2009) (internal quotation marks omitted).\n2\n           A court generally may not consider materials other than facts alleged in the\n3\n4    complaint and documents that are made a part of the complaint. Anderson v. Angelone,\n\n5    86 F.3d 932, 934 (9th Cir. 1996). However, a court may consider materials if (1) the\n6\n     authenticity of the materials is not disputed and (2) the plaintiff has alleged the existence\n7\n8    of the materials in the complaint or the complaint \u201cnecessarily relies\u201d on the materials.\n9    Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668, 688 (9th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted). The\n10\n     court may also take judicial notice of matters of public record outside of the pleadings\n11\n12   and consider them for purposes of the motion to dismiss. Mir v. Little Co. of Mary\n13   Hosp., 844 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1988); Lee, 250 F.3d at 689-90.\n14\n                                         III.   DISCUSSION\n15\n16      A. The DMCA Anti-Circumvention Provision\n17         Congress enacted the DMCA in 1998 to \u201cconform United States copyright law\n18\n     to its obligations under two World Intellectual Property Organization (\u201cWIPO\u201d)\n19\n20   treaties, which require contracting parties to provide effective legal remedies against\n21   the circumvention of protective technological measures used by copyright owners.\u201d\n22\n     MDY Industries, LLC v. Blizzard Ent., Inc., 629 F.3d 928, 942 (2010). Congress also\n23\n24   recognized \u201cthe ease with which digital works can be copied and distributed worldwide\n25\n     virtually instantaneously\u201d so without protections, \u201ccopyright owners will hesitate to\n26\n     make their works readily available on the Internet.\u201d Sen. Rep. No. 105-190 at 8. Thus,\n27\n28   protective legislation would \u201ccreate[] the legal platform for launching the global digital\n\n                                                 8\n\f Case 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK      Document 70 Filed 08/19/26       Page 9 of 17 Page ID\n                                       #:457\n\n\n1    on-line marketplace for copyrighted works\u201d and \u201cfacilitate making available . . . via the\n2\n     Internet the movies, music, software, and literary works that are the fruit of American\n3\n4    creative genius.\u201d Id.\n\n5          Section 1201(a)(1)(A) provides that, \u201c[n]o person shall circumvent a\n6\n     technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this\n7\n8    title.\u201d 17 U.S.C. \u00a7 1201(a)(1)(A). A technological measure effectively controls access\n9    to a work if, \u201cin the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of\n10\n     information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to\n11\n12   gain access to the work.\u201d 17 U.S.C. \u00a7 1201(a)(3)(B). To circumvent a technological\n13   measure means \u201cto descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or\n14\n     otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure,\n15\n16   without the authority of the copyright owner.\u201d 17 U.S.C. \u00a7 1201(a)(3)(A).\n17      B. Present Action\n18\n           Plaintiffs asserts a single cause of action against Defendant: breach of the anti-\n19\n20   circumvention provisions of 17 U.S.C. \u00a7 1201(a). Defendant argues that Plaintiffs have\n21   failed a state a claim. The Court reviews each of Defendant\u2019s arguments in turn.\n22\n               a. Public Access of YouTube Videos\n23\n24         Defendant first contends that Plaintiffs have not alleged a violation of the DMCA\n25\n     because \u201ctheir works are freely accessible.\u201d Mot. at 19-22. Defendant argues that\n26\n     Plaintiffs have conceded that users may \u201cwatch and listen to YouTube content for free\u201d\n27\n28   and do not allege that \u201cusers encounter any technological measure before they are able\n\n                                               9\n\fCase 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK        Document 70 Filed 08/19/26       Page 10 of 17 Page ID\n                                        #:458\n\n\n1    to perceive the works \u2013 no paywall, password, authentication, nor any other barrier.\u201d\n2\n     Id. at 20. However, this argument is unsupported by the factual allegations in the CAC\n3\n4    and the legal precedent of this circuit.\n\n5          As an initial matter, Plaintiffs do allege that a user encounters the TPMs to access\n6\n     the content. According to the CAC, a user will not be able to access content except\n7\n8    through YouTube\u2019s authorized streaming architecture. Each of the alleged TPMs serve\n9    the control access to the work by ensuring access only through the permitted channel:\n10\n     the YouTube streaming architecture. See CAC \u00b6\u00b6 2, 38.\n11\n12         The rolling cipher and proof of origin tokens, as alleged, each require a user to\n13   satisfy certain conditions in advance of viewing the content, or providing the proprietary\n14\n     decryption key and providing correct proof-of-origin tokens. CAC \u00b6\u00b6 50-52, 62-65.\n15\n16   Plaintiffs further allege that access is restricted through the temporary, session-bound\n17   media URLs which permit access only for a limited period and particular session. Id.\n18\n     \u00b6\u00b6 56-57. Moreover, Plaintiffs allege that YouTube retroactively monitors access by\n19\n20   using IP-based blocking, rate monitoring, and CAPTCHA challenges to detect and\n21   restrict suspicious or prohibited activity. Id. \u00b6\u00b6 53-55, 58-61. Whether, as a factual\n22\n     matter, these technological measures actually function as TPMs is an inappropriate\n23\n24   inquiry at this stage. Plaintiffs have plausibly alleged that these measures do control\n25\n     access under the meaning of the DMCA.\n26\n           The Court is not persuaded by Defendant\u2019s contention that a technological\n27\n28   measure does not control access merely because the user does not affirmatively interact\n\n                                                10\n\fCase 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK        Document 70 Filed 08/19/26        Page 11 of 17 Page ID\n                                        #:459\n\n\n1    with a visible barrier. Mot. at 20. Nothing in \u00a7 1201(a) requires an access control to take\n2\n     the form of a paywall, password prompt, or other measure requiring affirmative user\n3\n4    input. Rather, the statutory inquiry is whether the technological measure, \u201cin the\n\n5    ordinary course of its operation,\u201d requires the application of authorized \u201cinformation,\n6\n     or a process or a treatment\u201d to gain access to the work. 17 U.S.C. \u00a7 1201(a)(3)(B).\n7\n8          As alleged, YouTube\u2019s system performs background authentication and\n9    authorization processes before granting access to a video, and continued access remains\n10\n     subject to additional technological restrictions. The fact that these access restrictions\n11\n12   may be less onerous than other potential protective measures, or readily permit access\n13   to users who satisfy relatively minimal requirements, does not mean that no barriers to\n14\n     access exist. As alleged, the barriers exist and require users to satisfy certain conditions\n15\n16   before obtaining access. Those barriers may be modest, perhaps by design given\n17   YouTube\u2019s business model, but they are barriers nonetheless. At the pleadings stage,\n18\n     Plaintiffs\u2019 allegations are sufficient.\n19\n20         This position is consistent with the Ninth Circuit\u2019s previous holding in Disney\n21   Enterprises, Inc. v. VidAngel Inc., upholding a preliminary injunction based in part on\n22\n     violations of the DMCA anti-circumvention provision. Disney distributed and licensed\n23\n24   its work through specified distribution channels, including the sale of physical DVDs\n25\n     or Blu-Ray discs. Disney Ent., Inc. v. VidAngel, Inc., 869 F.3d 848, 853 (9th Cir. 2017).\n26\n     These discs included encryption-based technological protection measures that allowed\n27\n28   licensed players to decrypt content for lawful playback. Id. VidAngel purchased several\n\n                                                11\n\fCase 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK       Document 70 Filed 08/19/26      Page 12 of 17 Page ID\n                                       #:460\n\n\n1    of these DVDs and Blu-Ray discs and used a software to decrypt them, obtaining a\n2\n     digital copy of the content. Id. Once decrypted, VidAngel created and sold versions of\n3\n4    the copyrighted material with certain \u201cobjectionable content\u201d removed. Id. at 853-54.\n\n5          The Ninth Circuit concluded that, by bypassing the encryption on the DVD and\n6\n     Blu-Ray discs without authorization, VidAngel had circumvented an access control in\n7\n8    violation of the DMCA. Id. at 865. Significantly, the Ninth Circuit rejected the\n9    proposition that a work ceases to be protected by an access control merely because\n10\n     consumers have authorized means of accessing it, observing \u201c[n]othing in the legislative\n11\n12   history suggests that VidAngel did not circumvent an access control simply because\n13   there are authorized ways to access the [] works.\u201d Id.\n14\n           The same reasoning applies here. As alleged, YouTube\u2019s TPMs condition access\n15\n16   to the videos on use of YouTube\u2019s authorized streaming architecture and satisfaction of\n17   the technological requirements embedded within that process. The fact that members of\n18\n     the public may ordinarily access the videos without payment does not establish that the\n19\n20   works are technologically unrestricted. Just as the authorized players in VidAngel\n21   provided consumers with an authorized means of accessing encrypted DVDs and Blu-\n22\n     ray discs, YouTube\u2019s streaming architecture provides an authorized means of accessing\n23\n24   video content. See also Sony Music Ent. v. Uncharted Labs, Inc., 2026 WL 1019199, at\n25\n     * 3 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 15, 2026) (declining to dismiss a complaint based on allegations\n26\n     that YouTube\u2019s rolling cipher served as a TPM under the DMCA anti-circumvention\n27\n28   provision); Yout LLC v. Recording Industry Ass\u2019n of Am., Inc., 633 F. Supp. 3d 650,\n\n                                              12\n\fCase 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK        Document 70 Filed 08/19/26        Page 13 of 17 Page ID\n                                        #:461\n\n\n1    666-72 (D. Conn. 2022) (concluding that Plaintiff failed to plausibly allege that\n2\n     YouTube did not use technological protections measures that control access to the\n3\n4    copyrighted works within the meaning of the DMCA).\n\n5          In short, the Court concludes that the Plaintiffs works are not freely accessible,\n6\n     still requiring certain technological requirements be met prior to access.\n7\n8              b. TPMs as Access Controls\n9          Defendant next argues that Plaintiffs asserted TPMs are only \u201ccopy controls,\u201d not\n10\n     \u201caccess controls\u201d under the meaning of DMCA. Defendant argues that each of the five\n11\n12   TPMs alleged only limit downloading content, not accessing it. Mot. at 22-28.\n13   However, Defendant\u2019s arguments are inconsistent with Plaintiff\u2019s allegations or present\n14\n     factual disputes that are inappropriate for resolution at this stage.\n15\n16                    i. The Rolling Cipher\n17         Defendant argues the rolling cipher is not an access control since (1) it functions\n18\n     as a lock with a key attached at all times; (2) does not restrict the file URL because a\n19\n20   sophisticated user may still obtain the file; and (3) is only a copy control, not an access\n21   control. Mot. 23-25.\n22\n           The first argument is unpersuasive. Contrary to Defendant\u2019s assertion, Plaintiff\n23\n24   has not alleged that the rolling cipher is a lock with the key perpetually attached. Rather,\n25\n     Plaintiffs allege that the rolling cipher requires the key, or the proprietary YouTube\n26\n     decryption, to provide the video. CAC \u00b6 50. Defendant\u2019s second argument presents a\n27\n28   pure factual dispute about the mechanics of the rolling cipher and YouTube\u2019s webpage\n\n                                                13\n\fCase 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK        Document 70 Filed 08/19/26       Page 14 of 17 Page ID\n                                        #:462\n\n\n1    that is inappropriate for resolution at this stage.\n2\n           Finally, the argument that the rolling cipher is only alleged as a copy control is\n3\n4    unavailing. As a matter of law, it is irrelevant that the rolling cipher may also restrict\n\n5    download access since the statute does \u201cnot provide that a TPM cannot serve as both an\n6\n     access control and a use control.\u201d Disney Ent., Inc., 869 F.3d at 864. Moreover,\n7\n8    Plaintiffs do allege that the rolling cipher restricts viewing and streaming since\n9    streaming is restricted to the YouTube streaming architecture, which provides the\n10\n     relevant encryption key. CAC \u00b6\u00b6 50-52; see also Cordova v. Huneault, 817 F. Supp. 3d\n11\n12   819, 834 (N.D. Cal. 2026) (finding that plaintiff had adequately pled that YouTube\u2019s\n13   rolling cipher effectively controlled access under \u00a7 1201(a)). To the degree that\n14\n     Defendant\u2019s dispute Plaintiffs\u2019 characterization of the rolling cipher, they present a\n15\n16   question of fact inappropriate for resolution at the pleadings stage.\n17         Thus, the Court concludes that the rolling cipher, as alleged, constitutes an access\n18\n     control.\n19\n20                   ii. IP Blocking and Rate Limiting\n21         Defendant first argues that the IP blocking and rate limiting cannot be a copy\n22\n     control because it targets copying, or downloads, of the video. However, as previously\n23\n24   discussed, Plaintiffs have alleged that IP blocking and rate limiting control access to the\n25\n     platform as a whole because YouTube authenticates a requestor\u2019s IP address before\n26\n     allowing the user to proceed to the site. CAC \u00b6 103.\n27\n28         Next, Defendant argues that these procedures are a \u201cmonitoring and blocking\n\n                                                 14\n\fCase 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK       Document 70 Filed 08/19/26       Page 15 of 17 Page ID\n                                       #:463\n\n\n1    system\u201d that cannot effectively control access to a work under the meaning of the\n2\n     DMCA because there is no application of a process to \u201cgain access to the work.\u201d Mot.\n3\n4    at 25-26. However, the fact that a measure may revoke access after access has initially\n\n5    been granted does not preclude that measure from qualifying as an access control under\n6\n     the meaning of the DMCA. The Ninth Circuit has rejected that proposition, noting that\n7\n8    an access control includes measures that \u201crevoke access if a secondary check determines\n9    that access was unauthorized.\u201d MDY Industries, LLC, 629 F.3d at 943. As alleged, the\n10\n     IP blocking and rate monitoring systems serve as this \u201csecondary check,\u201d by monitoring\n11\n12   for suspicious activity and revoking access when the resulting data indicates that access\n13   was improper.\n14\n                     iii. Session-Bound Short Lived URLs\n15\n16          Defendant argues that there are no factual allegations that Defendant or any user\n17   could not use these URLs to view a work without restriction before its expiration. Mot.\n18\n     at 26. The argument here is not appropriate for the pleadings stage. Plaintiffs have\n19\n20   plausibly alleged that Defendant must have \u201cprogrammatically renew[ed] access\n21   credentials outside ordinary playback sessions\u201d in order to engage in bulk extraction of\n22\n     YouTube videos. CAC \u00b6\u00b6 93, 109. At this stage, these allegations are sufficient.\n23\n24                   iv. CAPTCHA Challenges\n25\n           Defendant first argues that CAPTCHA challenges cannot be a TPM under the\n26\n     DMCA because they do not \u201cinitially block a user\u2019s attempt to view a video and only\n27\n28   appear in limited circumstances[.]\u201d Mot. at 27. However, as noted in the discussion on\n\n                                               15\n\fCase 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK       Document 70 Filed 08/19/26        Page 16 of 17 Page ID\n                                       #:464\n\n\n1    IP blocking and rate limiting, the Ninth Circuit has held that technological programs\n2\n     that control access after its initial grant may still qualify as an access control. MDY\n3\n4    Industries, LLC, 629 F.3d at 943.\n\n5          Defendant next argues that Plaintiffs have failed to plead that Defendant was\n6\n     prevented from accessing a particular video due to the CAPTCHA challenges. This\n7\n8    position, however, misstates Plaintiffs\u2019 position. Plaintiffs do not assert that Defendant\n9    met and completed CAPTCHA challenges. Rather, that Defendant engaged in behavior\n10\n     that would ordinarily have triggered CAPTCHA challenges but Defendant used\n11\n12   processes like IP rotation to avoid the mechanism entirely. CAC \u00b6 59. These allegations\n13   are sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.\n14\n                     v. Proof of Origin Tokens\n15\n16         Finally, with respect to the proof of origin tokens, Defendant advances arguments\n17   similar to those it raised regarding the rolling cipher. Defendant argues that the proof of\n18\n     origin tokens are, at best, a lock with the key attached. Mot. at 27-28. However, these\n19\n20   arguments are unpersuasive for the same reasons the Court articulated in its analysis of\n21   the rolling cipher. The proof of origin tokens, as alleged by Plaintiffs, limit access to\n22\n     videos by ensuring access requests originate from the intended playback context. CAC\n23\n24   \u00b6 62. Again, to the extent Defendant disputes the operations of the proof of origin\n25\n     tokens, such arguments are inappropriate at the pleadings stage.\n26\n           Accordingly, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged that\n27\n28   each of the TPMs serve as access controls, not copy controls.\n\n                                               16\n\fCase 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK      Document 70 Filed 08/19/26        Page 17 of 17 Page ID\n                                      #:465\n\n\n1       C. Sufficiency of Allegations Around Timing\n2\n           Finally, Defendant argues that Plaintiffs have not sufficiently alleged information\n3\n4    on the technological measures in place at the time of the alleged circumvention.\n\n5    Defendant claims that \u201cPlaintiffs have described a variety of technological measures\u201d\n6\n     but \u201cPlaintiffs have not alleged any information about when YouTube implemented\n7\n8    those measures \u2013 let alone whether they were in place at the time Snap accessed the\n9    videos.\u201d Mot. at 28-29.\n10\n           Reading the CAC in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, this\n11\n12   argument is not convincing. Plaintiffs have alleged that the five TPMs existed at the\n13   time Defendant scraped the YouTube videos. CAC \u00b6\u00b6 45-49. This is sufficient to\n14\n     support the timing element and place Defendant on notice.\n15\n16                                    IV.     CONCLUSION\n17   For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Defendant\u2019s Motion to Dismiss.\n18\n     IT IS SO ORDERED.\n19\n20   Dated: August 19, 2026                 _______________________________________\n21                                          HONORABLE ANDR\u00c9 BIROTTE JR.\n                                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE\n22\n23\n24\n25\n26\n27\n28\n                                               17\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2026-08-20T17:59:28.543550-07:00","document_number":"70","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048651351","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":false,"document_type":1,"description":"Order on Motion to Dismiss","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-08-19T19:01:58.856658-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.476064-07:00","date_filed":"2026-08-19","time_filed":"18:41:25","entry_number":70,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-08-19.001","pacer_sequence_number":253,"description":"ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS 42 by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. See document for details. (gk) (Entered: 08/19/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/474359496/","id":474359496,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/489858601/","id":489858601,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"","date_created":"2026-08-13T12:06:17.233019-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-13T12:06:17.233027-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Appear Pro Hac Vice","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-08-13T12:06:17.221668-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-13T12:06:17.221677-07:00","date_filed":"2026-08-13","time_filed":"11:38:47","entry_number":null,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-08-13.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/474213235/","id":474213235,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/489706064/","id":489706064,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/68/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-08-12T13:04:10.013823-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:23.013080-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":6,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"68","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048580186","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":false,"document_type":1,"description":"Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice (G-64)","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/491324723/","id":491324723,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/68/1/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-08-25T15:51:08.578327-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:51:08.578340-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":1,"file_size":1258291,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"68","attachment_number":1,"pacer_doc_id":"031048580187","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Proposed Order","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-08-12T13:04:09.990727-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.445462-07:00","date_filed":"2026-08-12","time_filed":"12:56:37","entry_number":68,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-08-12.001","pacer_sequence_number":243,"description":"APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Justin A. Nelson to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiffs Nicole Chmura, Matt Fisher, Golfholics, Inc., Ted Entertainment, Inc. (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $450 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-43034501) filed by Plaintiffs Nicole Chmura, Matt Fisher, Golfholics, Inc., Ted Entertainment, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Attorney Justin A Nelson added to party Nicole Chmura(pty:pla), Attorney Justin A Nelson added to party Matt Fisher(pty:pla), Attorney Justin A Nelson added to party Golfholics, Inc.(pty:pla), Attorney Justin A Nelson added to party Ted Entertainment, Inc.(pty:pla)) (Nelson, Justin) (Entered: 08/12/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/473554343/","id":473554343,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/489023022/","id":489023022,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/67/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-08-06T14:36:21.203234-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-07T12:42:20.526896-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":6,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"67","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048532664","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":false,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice (Other)","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/491324724/","id":491324724,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/67/1/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-08-25T15:51:09.039885-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:51:09.039904-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":64,"file_size":29150412,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"67","attachment_number":1,"pacer_doc_id":"031048532665","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit A","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-08-06T14:36:21.173092-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.433546-07:00","date_filed":"2026-08-06","time_filed":"14:29:43","entry_number":67,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-08-06.001","pacer_sequence_number":241,"description":"Notice of Supplemental Authority filed by Plaintiffs Nicole Chmura, Matt Fisher, Golfholics, Inc., Ted Entertainment, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Nath, Rohit) (Entered: 08/06/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/472196322/","id":472196322,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/487623050/","id":487623050,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/62/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-07-27T06:14:39.113279-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:22.841496-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"62","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice of Filing Transcript","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-27T06:14:39.093335-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.397215-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-21","time_filed":null,"entry_number":62,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-21.002","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"**SEE NOTICE OF CLERICAL ERROR 64 ** NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings 7/17/2026 re Transcript 61 THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (jmo) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 07/21/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/472196321/","id":472196321,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/487623049/","id":487623049,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/66/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-07-27T06:14:38.983538-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:22.693313-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"66","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice of Filing Transcript","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-27T06:14:38.874792-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.421206-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-21","time_filed":null,"entry_number":66,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-21.004","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings 7/17/2026 re Transcript 65 THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (jmo) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 07/24/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/472103445/","id":472103445,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/487526110/","id":487526110,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/64/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-07-24T15:35:24.530580-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:22.974413-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"64","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048412984","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice of Clerical Error (G-11)","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-24T15:35:24.510549-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-27T06:14:38.799889-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-24","time_filed":"15:02:47","entry_number":64,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-24.001","pacer_sequence_number":233,"description":"NOTICE OF CLERICAL ERROR: Due to clerical error Re: Transcript (CV),, 61 (jmo) (Entered: 07/24/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/472103435/","id":472103435,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/487526100/","id":487526100,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/65/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-07-24T15:35:23.171906-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:22.759337-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"65","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048413013","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Transcript (CV)","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-24T15:35:23.151330-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.413127-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-21","time_filed":null,"entry_number":65,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-21.003","pacer_sequence_number":236,"description":"TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on 7/17/2026. Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder: Exceptional Reporting Services, Inc., phone number (361) 949-2988. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Notice of Intent to Redact due within 7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 8/11/2026. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 8/21/2026. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 10/19/2026. (jmo) (Entered: 07/24/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/472103420/","id":472103420,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/487526085/","id":487526085,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"","date_created":"2026-07-24T15:35:21.433390-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-24T15:35:21.433405-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice of Filing Transcript","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-24T15:35:21.421994-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-24T15:35:21.422010-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-24","time_filed":"15:07:13","entry_number":null,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-24.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/471708478/","id":471708478,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/487120388/","id":487120388,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/63/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-07-22T08:03:46.306751-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:22.498189-07:00","sha1":"1ff1b4c314300c1180a9797ea8a938ddacdd865a","page_count":1,"file_size":350465,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.1003845/gov.uscourts.cacd.1003845.63.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cacd.1003845/gov.uscourts.cacd.1003845.63.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"   Case 2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK         Document 63     Filed 07/17/26    Page 1 of 1 Page ID\n                                           #:335\n                           UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n                          CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA\n\n                               CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL\n\n\nCase No.:       2:26-cv-00754-AB-MBK                           Date:    July 17, 2026\n\n\nTitle:      Ted Entertainment, Inc. et al v. Snap Inc.\n\n\n Present: The Honorable        ANDR\u00c9 BIROTTE JR., United States District Judge\n                  Evelyn Chun                                    CourtSmart\n                  Deputy Clerk                                  Court Reporter\n\n      Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s):          Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s):\n      Morgan A.L. McCollum (pro hac)                         Joseph Charles Gratz\n             Michael Gervais                                     Daniel Mello\n              Rohit D. Nath\n       Thomas J. Kherkher (pro hac)\n             William Edelman\n\n Proceedings:           DEFENDANT SNAP INC.'S MOTION TO DISMISS\n                        PLAINTIFFS' CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION\n                        COMPLAINT [42]\n\n         The matter is called and counsel state their appearances.\n\n      The Court having carefully considered the papers and the evidence submitted by\nthe parties, and having heard the oral argument of counsel, hereby takes the motion under\nsubmission.\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                       00    :   43\nCV-90 (12/02)                      CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL               Initials of Deputy Clerk EVC\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2026-07-25T03:02:09.435668-07:00","document_number":"63","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048382208","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":false,"document_type":1,"description":"Order on Motion to Dismiss","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-22T08:03:46.285589-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.355314-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-17","time_filed":null,"entry_number":63,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-17.002","pacer_sequence_number":230,"description":"MINUTES OF Motion Hearing held before Judge Andre Birotte Jr. RE: Defendant Snap Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Consolidated Class Action Complaint 42 . The Court having carefully considered the papers and the evidence submitted by the parties, and having heard the oral argument of counsel, hereby takes the motion under submission. Court Smart: 07/17/2026. (gk) (Entered: 07/22/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/471641862/","id":471641862,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/487051598/","id":487051598,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/61/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-07-21T13:35:53.321177-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:22.937754-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"61","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048375070","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":true,"document_type":1,"description":"Transcript (CV)","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-21T13:35:53.294493-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.389082-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-21","time_filed":"13:13:35","entry_number":61,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-21.001","pacer_sequence_number":225,"description":"**SEE NOTICE OF CLERICAL ERROR 64 ** TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on 7/17/2026. Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder: Exceptional Reporting Services, Inc., phone number (361) 949-2988. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Notice of Intent to Redact due within 7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 8/11/2026. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 8/21/2026. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 10/19/2026. (jmo) (Entered: 07/21/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/471641851/","id":471641851,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/487051587/","id":487051587,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"","date_created":"2026-07-21T13:35:52.676041-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-21T13:35:52.688661-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice of Filing Transcript","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-21T13:35:52.656383-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-21T13:35:52.656395-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-21","time_filed":"13:14:15","entry_number":null,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-21.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/471520793/","id":471520793,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/486927563/","id":486927563,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/60/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-07-20T15:33:38.865377-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:22.573048-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"60","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048364295","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Transcript Order Form (G-120)","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-20T15:33:38.819551-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.380295-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-20","time_filed":"15:03:56","entry_number":60,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-20.003","pacer_sequence_number":223,"description":"TRANSCRIPT ORDER as to Interested Party for Court Smart (CS). Court will contact Lauren Cury at lauren.cury@hlc.com with further instructions regarding this order. Transcript preparation will not begin until payment has been satisfied with the transcription company. (cr) (Entered: 07/20/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/471484387/","id":471484387,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/486890639/","id":486890639,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/59/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-07-20T12:34:48.684614-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:22.600909-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"59","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048361391","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Transcript Order Form (G-120)","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-20T12:34:48.664906-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-27T06:14:39.153481-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-20","time_filed":"12:19:52","entry_number":59,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-20.002","pacer_sequence_number":221,"description":"TRANSCRIPT ORDER as to Non-Party Ted Entertainment, Inc. for Court Smart (CS). Court will contact Angela Merring at angela.merring@lw.com with further instructions regarding this order. Transcript preparation will not begin until payment has been satisfied with the transcription company. (Entered: 07/20/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/471462779/","id":471462779,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/486868741/","id":486868741,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/58/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-07-20T11:06:41.716742-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:22.639028-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"58","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048359789","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Transcript Order Form (G-120)","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-20T11:06:41.693997-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.363899-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-20","time_filed":"10:48:06","entry_number":58,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-20.001","pacer_sequence_number":219,"description":"TRANSCRIPT ORDER as to Plaintiff Nicole Chmura, Matt Fisher, Golfholics, Inc., Ted Entertainment, Inc. for Court Reporter. Court will contact Martha Izquierdo at mizquierdo@susmangodfrey.com with further instructions regarding this order. Transcript preparation will not begin until payment has been satisfied with the court reporter. (Nath, Rohit) (Entered: 07/20/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/471325254/","id":471325254,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/486726527/","id":486726527,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/57/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-07-17T19:03:25.626060-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-20T17:59:22.531633-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"57","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048355385","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Transcript Order Form (G-120)","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-17T19:03:25.582942-07:00","date_modified":"2026-08-25T15:48:26.344646-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-17","time_filed":"18:39:19","entry_number":57,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-17.001","pacer_sequence_number":217,"description":"TRANSCRIPT ORDER as to Defendant Snap Inc. for Court Smart (CS). Court will contact Amy Garcia at AmyGarcia@mofo.com with further instructions regarding this order. Transcript preparation will not begin until payment has been satisfied with the transcription company. (Mello, Daniel) (Entered: 07/17/2026)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/471176257/","id":471176257,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/72185144/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/486573307/","id":486573307,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/72185144/56/ted-entertainment-inc-v-snap-inc/","date_created":"2026-07-16T17:36:12.182228-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-16T17:36:12.202790-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"56","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"031048342284","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123)","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-07-16T17:36:12.153590-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-27T06:14:39.211591-07:00","date_filed":"2026-07-16","time_filed":"17:28:51","entry_number":56,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-07-16.001","pacer_sequence_number":214,"description":"Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Daniel R. Mello, Jr counsel for Defendant Snap Inc.. Adding Daniel R. Mello, Jr. as counsel of record for SNAP, INC. for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Defendant SNAP, INC.. (Attorney Daniel R. Mello, Jr added to party Snap Inc.(pty:dft))(Mello, Daniel) (Entered: 07/16/2026)","tags":[]}],"entries_total":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/?count=on&docket=72185144&page_size=40"}