In a case originally filed in July 2006, and later consolidated with a related case involving the same patent, the court granted defendants' motion to transfer venue to the Central District of California because (i) "California [is] the principal place of business of both [plaintiff] and [defendant] . . . [and] [t]his gives the California districts a particularized local interest in this suit no matter the outcome of the case," (ii) "even discounting all Asian witnesses from the 100 mile rule analysis, California is still a more convenient venue for the majority of the identified witnesses involved in this action," and (iii) "the weight of physical and documentary evidence is located within California" and "whether documents may be produced electronically is no longer relevant in the convenience analysis [under the 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)]." Although plaintiff presented evidence that "the median time to trial is 21.3 months in the Central District of California and 18 months in the Eastern District of Texas," other factors weighed in favor of granting defendants' motion to transfer.
Aten International Co. LTD. v. Belkin Corp., 2-06-cv-00296
(TXED June 25, 2009, Order) (Davis, J.)