Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted the defendant's unopposed motion to transfer consolidated data-breach class actions to the District of Minnesota under 28 U.S.C. § 1404. The court concluded that venue was proper in Minnesota and that the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice favored transfer.
Holdings
- Venue was proper in the District of Minnesota because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to Plaintiffs' claims occurred there.
- Transfer to the District of Minnesota was appropriate because the relevant convenience and interest-of-justice factors strongly favored Minnesota.
Questions Presented
- Whether venue was proper in the District of Minnesota for purposes of transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404.
- Whether the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice favored transferring the consolidated action from the Southern District of New York to the District of Minnesota.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (6)
- Everlast World's Boxing Headquarters Corp. v. Ringside, Inc., 928 F. Supp. 2d 735, 742 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)(followed)
- Van Dusen v. Barrack, 376 U.S. 612, 616 (1964)(followed)
- D.H. Blair & Co. v. Gottdiener, 462 F.3d 95, 106-07 (2d Cir. 2006)(followed)
- In re Bystolic Antitrust Litig., No. 20-CV-05735 (LJL), 2021 WL 148747, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2021)(followed)
- Tlapanco v. Elges, 207 F. Supp. 3d 324, 329 (S.D.N.Y. 2016)(followed)
- In re Eisner Advisory Group Data Breach Litigation, No. 25-CV-01409 (D. Minn.)(considered)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…