Friday, February 25, 2011

Eastern District of Texas Transfers False Marking Cases Lacking Connections to the District

The magistrate judge recommended granting defendant's motion to transfer venue of plaintiff's qui tam false marking action. "[T]he alleged actions that give rise to this lawsuit occurred in New Jersey. Plaintiff has alleged that [defendant] and its employees located in New Jersey have acted with an intent to deceive the public, creating an even stronger local interest in New Jersey. . . . Importantly, Plaintiff has no ties to this district, and [defendant] is headquartered in New Jersey. . . . On balance, even considering the additional products Plaintiff seeks to add to this case, this case has substantial factual connections to the District of New Jersey and no meaningful connection to the Eastern District of Texas."

Tex Pat, LLC v. Becton, Dickinson and Company, et. al.
, 5-10-cv-00123 (TXED February 22, 2011, Order) (Craven, M.J.)

Defendant's motion to transfer plaintiff's qui tam false marking action was granted. "[T]he significant majority of potential witnesses in this case are located near Rhode Island. The defendant names two witnesses that are likely to testify and are located in Seekonk, Massachusetts, which is less than 8 miles from the District of Rhode Island courthouse. The defendant is not aware of any potential witnesses located in the Eastern District of Texas or within 100 miles of the Marshall Division."

Promote Innovation LLC v. Little Kids, Inc., 2-10-cv-00135 (TXED February 23, 2011, Order) (Everingham, M.J.)

No comments: