Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Federal Judiciary Blogs -> Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice

Federal Judiciary

: Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice

Patent Case Transferred to Plaintiff's San Diego Location

By Michael C. Smith

HTI IP v. DriveOK, 6:09cv370 (E.D. Tex., 8/4/10)

Judge: Leonard Davis

Holding: Motion to Transfer Venue GRANTED

Plaintiffs in this case are from Georgia and California (Southern), and defendants are from Tennessee, Canada, Washington, California (Central).  The C.D. Cal. defendant moved for a transfer to the Southern District of California, where one of the two plaintiffs is located. 

Judge Davis granted the transfer, noting that "[t]his suit?s connections to Texas and the Eastern District of Texas are scant, and citizens of this District have no particularized interest in this case. No party is based in Texas, much less the Eastern District of Texas. At most, it appears that one inventor lives in Houston, Texas (Southern District of Texas), and NetworkFleet has an employee in Sachse, Texas (straddling the Eastern and Northern Districts of Texas) and Austin, Texas (Western District of Texas). The parties? principal places of business, and presumably their documents and party witnesses, are located in Tennessee, Canada, Washington state, California, and Georgia. Additional witnesses have been identified in Washington, D.C. and Hawaii." 

Instead, it was the California court's connection with the case that the Court found to be persuasive.  "In contrast," Judge Davis wrote, "the Southern District of California has a strong connection to this case. It is the home forum of Plaintiff NetworkFleet and neighbors the home forum of Defendant Xirgo. As such, citizens of the Southern District of California have a strong particularized interest in this case." 

Full post as published by Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice on August 12, 2010 (boomark / email).