Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California granted Honeywell International Inc.'s motion to transfer venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). The court concluded that the District of Arizona was more appropriate because the plaintiff primarily lived and worked there, the dispute principally arose there, Arizona was more familiar with potentially applicable law, and the District of Arizona had a less congested docket. The court ordered the action transferred to the District of Arizona and directed the clerk to close the case after forwarding the filings.
Holdings
- The motion to transfer venue is granted because Arizona is the state most familiar with the governing law, plaintiff's choice of forum is accorded little weight, Arizona is more convenient for witnesses, has greater local interest, and is less congested.
Questions Presented
- Whether the case should be transferred to the District of Arizona under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) for convenience of parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice
Disposition
transferred
Cases Cited (22)
- Van Dusen v. Barrack, 376 U.S. 612 (1964)(cited)
- Stewart Org., Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., 487 U.S. 22 (1988)(cited)
- Robert Bosch Healthcare Sys., Inc. v. Cardiocom, LLC, No. 3:14-cv-01575-EMC, 2014 WL 2702894 (N.D. Cal. June 13, 2014)(cited)
- Park v. Dole Fresh Vegetables, Inc., 964 F. Supp. 2d 1088 (N.D. Cal. 2013)(cited)
- Hatch v. Reliance Ins. Co., 758 F.2d 409 (9th Cir. 1985)(cited)
- Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Savage, 611 F.2d 270 (9th Cir. 1979)(cited)
- Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc., 211 F.3d 495 (9th Cir. 2000)(cited)
- Cochran v. NYP Holdings, Inc., 58 F. Supp. 2d 1113 (C.D. Cal. 1998)(cited)
- Atlantic Marine Const. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for W. Dist. of Tex., 571 U.S. 49 (2013)(cited)
- Citizens for Free Speech, LLC v. Cnty. of Alameda, 338 F. Supp. 3d 995 (N.D. Cal. 2018)(cited)
Showing top 10 of 22.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…