§Why CasetextPricing

Nazomi Communications Inc v. Nokia Corporation et al

OPPOSITION to MOTION to Transfer Case to Northern District of California 134

26 Cited authorities

  1. Stewart Org., Inc. v. Ricoh Corp.

    487 U.S. 22 (1988)   Cited 4,865 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that federal law determines the validity of a forum selection clause

  2. Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes Lerach

    523 U.S. 26 (1998)   Cited 845 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, because the remand requirement is absolute, the transferee court may not invoke the change-of-venue statute to assign transferred cases to itself for trial

  3. Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc.

    211 F.3d 495 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 1,589 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding the same in context of forum-selection-clause prohibition in California's franchise statute

  4. In re Genentech, Inc.

    566 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2009)   Cited 795 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that relevant evidence in patent cases often comes from the accused infringer and may weigh in favor of transfer to that location

  5. Heller Fin., Inc. v. Midwhey Powder Co., Inc.

    883 F.2d 1286 (7th Cir. 1989)   Cited 1,586 times
    Holding that a "forum-selection clause is not dispositive under § 1404"

  6. Decker Coal Co. v. Commonwealth Edison Co.

    805 F.2d 834 (9th Cir. 1986)   Cited 1,349 times
    Holding that moving party must make strong showing of inconvenience to warrant upsetting Plaintiff's choice of forum

  7. In re Horseshoe Entertainment

    337 F.3d 429 (5th Cir. 2003)   Cited 558 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that district court abused discretion by not transferring Title VII case under § 1404

  8. In re Hoffmann-La Roche

    587 F.3d 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2009)   Cited 321 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding local interest factor favored transfer where allegedly infringing product was developed in transferee district

  9. In re American Continental Corp. v. Weiss

    102 F.3d 1524 (9th Cir. 1996)   Cited 290 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting argument "that the district court erred in examining the MDL 834 record in ruling on" a motion to dismiss because "ample authority exists which recognizes that matters of public record, including court records in related or underlying cases which have a direct relation to the matters at issue, may be looked to when ruling on a 12(b) motion to dismiss"

  10. Micron v. Mosaid

    518 F.3d 897 (Fed. Cir. 2008)   Cited 200 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, under Medlmmune, declaratory judgment jurisdiction existed based on a cease and desist letter plus defendant's suits against other manufacturers

  11. Section 1404 - Change of venue

    28 U.S.C. § 1404   Cited 28,348 times   184 Legal Analyses
    Granting Class Plaintiffs' motion to transfer action in order to "facilitate a unified settlement approval process together with the class action cases in" In re Amex ASR