## Facts

- Publishers converted freelance authors’ articles into electronic formats and sold access through electronic databases without obtaining specific authorization for electronic reproduction.
- After a Supreme Court decision limited publishers’ ability to include freelance works in electronic databases without permission, the parties negotiated a global class-action settlement to resolve past infringement claims.
- The settlement provided up to $18 million in compensation and released infringement claims for both registered and unregistered works.
- The named plaintiffs alleged ownership of at least one registered copyright, but the settlement class included many claimants whose works were not registered.
- Some class members objected to settlement approval.

## Issues

1. Whether 17 U.S.C. § 411(a)’s registration requirement limits federal subject-matter jurisdiction over infringement claims involving unregistered works.
2. Whether a federal court may certify and approve a class settlement that releases infringement claims based on unregistered works when § 411(a) has not been satisfied for those works.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the Second Circuit and remanded.
- Section 411(a)’s registration requirement is a precondition to filing an infringement claim, not a restriction on federal courts’ subject-matter jurisdiction.
- Because the district court had subject-matter jurisdiction under the federal copyright and federal-question jurisdiction statutes, it had authority to approve a settlement encompassing claims involving unregistered works.
- The Court did not decide whether § 411(a) must be enforced by dismissal when timely raised or whether it must be applied sua sponte.

## Legal Principles

- A statutory condition is treated as jurisdictional only if Congress clearly states that it is jurisdictional; otherwise it is nonjurisdictional.
- Section 411(a) is a mandatory precondition to instituting an infringement action, but it does not withdraw subject-matter jurisdiction from federal courts.
- Separation between a statute’s precondition-to-suit language and distinct jurisdiction-granting provisions supports treating the precondition as nonjurisdictional.
- Mischaracterizing claim-preconditions as jurisdictional improperly triggers consequences such as nonwaivability and mandatory sua sponte enforcement absent clear congressional direction.

## Conclusion

The Court held that § 411(a)’s registration requirement is nonjurisdictional, so federal courts retain subject-matter jurisdiction over copyright infringement actions even when some claims involve unregistered works, permitting approval of a class settlement releasing such claims.


Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick, 559 U.S. 154 (2010)