Joe Hand Promotions sues Los Pinos Surf and Turf and two individuals over a Canelo Álvarez vs. Jermell Charlo fight showing in Phoenix

The complaint

Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Los Pinos Surf and Turf LLC d/b/a Los Pinos Surf and Turf, Roman Rascon-Murrieta, and Juanita Alicia Esparza, No. 2:26-cv-06964 (D. Ariz.), is a nine-page complaint filed September 29, 2026, ECF No. 1, in the Phoenix Division. It pleads jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). The case is assigned to Judge Steven P. Logan.

The telecast

Joe Hand Promotions, a Pennsylvania corporation, alleges that it held the exclusive commercial license to distribute and authorize the public display of the Canelo Álvarez vs. Jermell Charlo telecast of September 30, 2023, including all undercard bouts and commentary, to businesses such as the one in this case, and that commercial businesses could not receive and exhibit the program without its authorization. It alleges that the program was legally available to the defendants only after paying a commercial sublicense fee, set by the establishment's capacity.

What it alleges

The complaint alleges, upon information and belief, that Los Pinos Surf and Turf LLC is an Arizona limited liability company that operated the establishment known as Los Pinos Surf and Turf in Phoenix, Arizona, on the date of the program, and that Roman Rascon-Murrieta and Juanita Alicia Esparza are Arizona residents who operated and controlled the establishment, were owners of the entity and members, managers, officers, directors, shareholders and/or principals of it, and had the right and ability to supervise its activities and a direct financial interest in them. It alleges that the defendants chose not to pay the sublicense fee and instead unlawfully obtained the program by satellite signal or, in the alternative, by cable signal, and exhibited it to entice patrons while the establishment sold food and/or drinks.

Counts and relief

Count I alleges satellite piracy under 47 U.S.C. § 605 and, pled in the alternative, cable piracy under 47 U.S.C. § 553, and alleges the violation was willful and for commercial advantage or private financial gain. Count II alleges that the defendants' unauthorized public display of the program by any means, including cable, satellite, or internet stream, violated 17 U.S.C. §§ 106 and 501, and that the infringement was willful.

The prayer asks, against each defendant, for statutory damages of up to $110,000 for each willful violation of 47 U.S.C. § 605 or, alternatively, up to $60,000 for each willful violation of 47 U.S.C. § 553; attorney's fees, interest, and costs under 47 U.S.C. § 605(e)(3)(B)(iii) or, alternatively, § 553(c)(2)(C); statutory or other damages under the Copyright Act of up to $150,000 for each willful violation of 17 U.S.C. § 501; attorney's fees, interest, and costs under 17 U.S.C. § 505; and other relief.