Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Delay Seeking Transfer of Venue Trumps Other Convenience Factors

Defendant's motion to transfer venue was denied even though all but one factor favored transfer or was neutral. "While this case has not progressed as [far as] claim construction, the parties and the Court have expended substantial resources and the Court has become familiar with the issues in the case. Transferring this case now would impose upon [plaintiff] the burden of hiring new counsel in California who would then duplicate previously expended efforts developing an intimate familiarity with the facts and issues of the case. Moreover, the already-burdened judicial system will have wasted time developing familiarity with the case. Furthermore, [plaintiff] argues that it would lose the currently-set Markman and trial dates, delaying them for at least a year or more."

eTool Development, Inc. et al v. National Semiconductor Corporation, 2-08-cv-00196 (TXED March 15, 2010 Memorandum Opinion & Order) (Ward, J.)

No comments: