In denying defendants' motion to transfer venue for convenience, the court rejected the argument that the location of discovery and witnesses should be given weight in the court's convenience analysis. "In this electronic age, there are no substantial burdens associated with discovery or witness availability that support the need for transfer. With respect to discovery, documents generally are stored, transferred and reviewed electronically. . . . With respect to witnesses, generally the parties agree to take depositions where the witnesses are located (or the court can so order). Moreover, for those cases that get to trial, only a handful of witnesses testify live, and only a very small proportion of those documents produced during discovery are used as trial exhibits. Given these realities, this factor is outdated, irrelevant, and should be given little weight, if any, except for those rare exceptions where truly regional defendants are litigating."
XPRT Ventures, LLC v. eBay Inc., et. al., 1-10-cv-00595 (DED June 8, 2011, Order) (Robinson, J.)