Wilson Price v. Netflix, Inc.

Case: 26-1343 Document: 11 Page: 1 Filed: 04/15/2026

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ RENZIE WILSON PRICE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. NETFLIX, INC., DENNIS LIU, JASON PIPERBERG, MICHAEL B. JORDAN, CHARLES D. KING, CAROL BARBEE, KIM ROTH, POPPY HANKS, KENNY GOODMAN, OUTLIER SOCIETY LLC, MACRO MEDIA LLC, Defendants-Appellees ______________________ 2026-1343 ______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in No. 2:22-cv-04568-JAK- PD, Judge John A. Kronstadt. ______________________ ORDER Before DYK, REYNA, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

In response to this court’s show cause order, the parties correctly note that we lack jurisdiction over this copyright infringement case. See 28 U.S.C. § 1295. While appellees Case: 26-1343 Document: 11 Page: 2 Filed: 04/15/2026

2 WILSON PRICE v. NETFLIX, INC. urge dismissal, we deem it the better course to transfer to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: This appeal and all case filings are transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

FOR THE COURT

April 15, 2026 Date

1 The court notes that the parties dispute the timeli- ness of this appeal: Netflix contends this appeal is untimely because it appears the district court’s clerk’s office received Mr. Wilson Price’s notice of appeal outside the statutory time to appeal, while Mr. Wilson Price argues the appeal is timely because he purports to have emailed a notice of ap- peal to the district court judge’s chambers within that time, to which Netflix responds with out-of-circuit case law indi- cating that such an email is insufficient. Under the cir- cumstances, we deem it the better course to transfer, leaving it to the Ninth Circuit to assess the parties’ argu- ments as to timeliness.