Numerous Motions to Transfer Venue Granted in GeoTag Cases

The court granted defendants' motion to sever and transfer venue from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District of Texas and rejected plaintiff's argument that practical problems weighed against transfer. "This litigation involves over 100 cases against in excess of 400 defendants. Although [plaintiff] asserts the [same] patent in each case, none of the cases involve related defendants or overlapping products or services. [Plaintiff] argues that having a single court familiar with the facts and legal issues would produce significant gains in judicial economy. The Court disagrees. . . . [Plaintiff] has not pointed to any 'common issues' that would not be present in all infringement cases (i.e. claim construction). . . . The Court will not permit the existence of separately filed cases to sway its transfer analysis. Otherwise, a plaintiff could manipulate venue by serially filling cases within a single district."

GeoTag Inc. v. Aromatique Inc., et. al., 2-10-cv-00570 (TXED January 14, 2013, Order) (Schneider, J.).