Sturdza v. United Arab Emirates

Case: 13-1435 Document: 6 Page: 1 Filed: 08/02/2013
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
__________________________
ELENA STURDZA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES,
Defendant-Appellee.
__________________________
2013-1435
__________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia in case no. 98-CV-2051, Judge
Barbara J. Rothstein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ELENA STURDZA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, ANGELOS
DEMETRIOU & ASSOCIATES, SZYMKOWICZ &
ASSOCIATES, JOHN T. SZYMKOWICZ,
MOHAMMED MATTAR, ROBERTS AND
BROWNELL, THOMAS BROWNELL, MARK LANE,
STEVEN TEPPLER, JOHN C. LAPRADE, FRAZIER
WALTON, JR., COVINGTON & BURLING,
ANTHONY HERMAN, RON DOVE, MINTZ, LEVIN,
Case: 13-1435 Document: 6 Page: 2 Filed: 08/02/2013
STURDZA v. UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 2
COHEN, FERRIS, GLOVSKY & POPEO, P.C., DAVID
T. SHAPIRO, LEWIN & LEWIN, NATHAN LEWIN,
ALYZA D. LEWIN, MORRISON ARCHITECTS, ERIC
MORRISON, AND VASILIOS DEMETRIOU,
Personal Representative of the Estate of
Angelos C. Demetriou,
Defendants.
__________________________
2013-1453
__________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia in No. 08-CV-1642, Judge Barbara
J. Rothstein.
__________________________
PER CURIAM.
ORDER
The court considers whether these recently docketed
appeals should be dismissed.
Elena Sturdza purports to appeal from two judgments
of the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia, in related cases involving charges of copyright
infringement. In both cases, a guardian ad litem has been
appointed by the district court to conduct this litigation
on behalf of Ms. Sturdza. It also appears that proceedings
before the district court remain pending.
This court is a court of limited jurisdiction, which does
not include jurisdiction in these copyright infringement
matters. 28 U.S.C. § 1295. Although this court is author-
ized to transfer a case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631 “if it
is in the interest of justice,” because Ms. Sturdza purport-
ed to appeal without the knowledge and authorization of
her guardian ad litem, we cannot say that it would be
Case: 13-1435 Document: 6 Page: 3 Filed: 08/02/2013
3 STURDZA v. UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
proper to do so here. See generally Thomas v. Humfield,
916 F.2d 1032, 1034 (5th Cir. 1990) (“The appointment of
a guardian ad litem deprives the litigant of the right to
control the litigation. . . .”).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) The appeals are dismissed.
(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
(3) All pending motions are moot.
FOR THE COURT
/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole
Daniel E. O’Toole
Clerk
s28