Update 9/6/22: A judge dismisses another complaint filed by Spencer Elden. A U.S. District Judge said that Elden waited too long to claim that Kurt Cobain’s band sexually exploited him since he filed his complaint after the 10-year statute of limitations had expired. This dismissal comes after Elden’s third filing. The judge’s most recent dismissal prevents Elden from filing a fourth.

Update 1/20/21: Spencer Elden filed a second amended complaint on Jan. 19, 2022. The case is ongoing.

A legal battle over the cover image of Nirvana’s 1991 album, Nevermind, known as the “Nirvana Baby Lawsuit,” has been dismissed by a federal judge. Nearly 30 years after appearing as the nude baby on the cover of the album, Spencer Elden filed a lawsuit against the band’s estate, claiming the image was considered child pornography. On Monday, Jan. 3, Judge Fernando M. Olguin of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California dismissed the case after Elden’s lawyers did not respond the defendants’ motion to dismiss by a Dec. 30 deadline.

[Read: Fair Use or Copyright Infringement? Analysis of the LeBron James Social Media Lawsuit]

Elden has until Jan. 13 to file a second complaint that addresses the motion to dismiss. A lawyer for Elden, Robert Y. Lewis, told The New York Times that the legal team intended to file the complaint ahead of that new deadline, citing “confusion” over the original deadline.

While an amended complaint could still bring the lawsuit back in front of a judge, the dismissal on technical grounds could leave questions about the infamous album cover unanswered. In the Nirvana baby lawsuit, Elden claimed the photo shoot resulted in child exploitation and child pornography, filing suit against the band, photographer and production companies, and asking for $150,000 from each defendant.

[Read: Judge Dismisses Lawsuit by Wedding Photographer Wanting to Refuse Same-Sex Clients]

Elden said the album was originally supposed to have a sticker over the genitals. He also claimed that his parents did not sign a release giving the band permission to use the image. While Elden’s parents reportedly received a few hundred dollars for the shoot, Elden claimed that he was not compensated. He was 4 months old at the time of the shoot.

In the motion to dismiss, lawyers for the Nirvana Baby lawsuit argued that the statute of limitations had expired and that Elden knew about the image for decades before filing suit. The legal team also argued that “Elden’s own conduct” suggests that the image is not child pornography. The request for dismissal includes a list of that conduct, including Elden reenacting the image several times.

The band’s lawyers claim that Elden received compensation for those re-enactments, as well as for public appearances and selling autographed copies of the album. “Elden has spent three decades profiting from his celebrity as the self-anointed ‘Nirvana Baby’” the band’s estate said in the filing submitted in December 2021.

[Read: Photographer Wins Lawsuit Against D.C. Metropolitan Police]

According to BBC, Elden recreated the cover on the album’s 25th anniversary, where an adult Elden was photographed in the same pool wearing swim trunks, with “Nevermind” tattooed across his chest, potentially discrediting his claims in the Nirvana baby lawsuit. The dollar on a fishhook, which was not part of the unedited original photo, wasn’t in the re-creation. Elden also shared images for the 10th, 17th, and 20th anniversaries of the album’s release.

The original image was photographed by Kirk Weedle, who specialized in underwater photography. Elden was one of four infants brought to the shoot. According to Entertainment Weekly, the baby drifted in the pool for three to four seconds, and Weedle had his shot after five images.