We do not deviate from the long line of Ninth Circuit cases which hold that appellate review of summary judgments is governed by the question of whether a genuine issue of material fact exists. Although International Luggage referred to the clearly erroneous principle in reversing a grant of summary judgment, the panel in fact substituted its judgment for that of the district court's. 1964), a case where review occurred after trial, as support for its statement. In fact, International Luggage cited Williams v. This is true where there has been a trial. 1976), stated that the question of substantial similarity is one of fact and an appeal is governed by the clearly erroneous principle under Rule 52(a). We therefore reverse and remand for trial. 1941) (two plays differed substantially in plot, character interest, general purpose, and intent). Similarly, summary judgment for defendant is appropriate where works are so dissimilar that a claim of infringement is without merit. A grant of summary judgment for plaintiff is proper where works are so overwhelmingly identical that the possibility of independent creation is precluded. 2d 49 (1980) (similarities related only to non-copyrightable historical material). 6 Summary judgment is appropriate, for example, where undisputed facts raise a complete defense as a matter of law. We do not imply that summary judgment is never appropriate in copyright infringement actions.

Battlestar galactica vs star wars