§Why CasetextPricing

Robert Bosch Healthcare Systems, Inc. v. CardioCom, LLC et al

RESPONSE

11 Cited authorities

  1. Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp.

    486 U.S. 800 (1988)   Cited 3,127 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the appeal belonged before the regional circuit because the claims did not arise under patent law

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. In re Cragar Industries, Inc.

    706 F.2d 503 (5th Cir. 1983)   Cited 63 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "when . . . post-transfer events frustrate the original purpose for transfer, a return of the case to the original transferor court does not foul the rule of the case nor place the transferee court in a position of reviewing the decision of its sister court"

  5. Arete Power, Inc. v. Beacon Power Corporation

    No. C 07-5167 WDB (N.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2008)   Cited 15 times
    Transferring case after evaluating list of non-party and party witnesses proffered by defendant

  6. West Marine, Inc. v. Watercraft Superstore, Inc.

    No. C11-04459 HRL (N.D. Cal. Feb. 14, 2012)   Cited 6 times

    No. C11-04459 HRL 02-14-2012 WEST MARINE, INC., Plaintiff, v. WATERCRAFT SUPERSTORE, INC., Defendant. HOWARD R. LLOYD NOT FOR CITATION ORDER (1) DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION; (2) DENYING DEFENDANT'S ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE; AND (3) GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE [Re: Docket Nos. 3, 15] Plaintiff West Marine, Inc. ("West Marine") brought this action against defendant Watercraft Superstore, Inc. ("Watercraft") in Santa Cruz County

  7. Goor v. Vignoles

    No. C 12-01794 DMR (N.D. Cal. Nov. 13, 2012)   Cited 2 times

    No. C 12-01794 DMR 11-13-2012 MARTIN GOOR, Plaintiff, v. MARK VIGNOLES, Defendant. DONNA M. RYU ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO RETRANSFER CASE Plaintiff Martin Goor moves the court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404 and 1391 to retransfer this case to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. For the reasons set forth below, the court DENIES the motion. I. Background and Procedural History On October 26, 2011, Goor, a New Jersey citizen, filed this suit against Defendant Mark

  8. Opperman v. Path, Inc.

    Case No. 13-cv-00453-JST (N.D. Cal. Jan. 22, 2014)   Cited 1 times

    Case No. 13-cv-00453-JST 01-22-2014 MARC OPPERMAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. PATH, INC., et al., Defendants. JON S. TIGAR ORDER DENYING KIK INTERACTIVE, INC.'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: Opperman v. Path, Inc., No. 13-cv-453 Before the Court is Defendant Kik Interactive, Inc.'s ("Kik") Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, ECF No. 366. The Court will deny the motion. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND This action was filed in the Western District

  9. Robert Bosch HealthCare Sys., Inc. v. MedApps, Inc.

    CASE NO. 3:12-cv-00113-JSC RS (N.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2012)

    CASE NO. 3:12-cv-00113-JSC RS 04-03-2012 ROBERT BOSCH HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiffs, v. MEDAPPS, INC., Defendants, ANDREW Y. CHOUNG, ESQ. (Bar No. 203192) ECHELON LAW GROUP, PC Attorneys for Defendant, MedApps, Inc. ANDREW Y. CHOUNG, ESQ. (Bar No. 203192) ECHELON LAW GROUP, PC Attorneys for Defendant, MedApps, Inc. NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT MEDAPPS, INC.; PROPOSED ORDER Pursuant to Rule 11-5 of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Northern District

  10. Russell v. IU International Corp.

    685 F. Supp. 172 (N.D. Ill. 1988)   Cited 9 times
    Identifying the sole purpose of the initial transfer as an opportunity to consolidate cases; original purpose of the transfer was therefore frustrated when the transferee-court denies relatedness between the two cases and refuses to grant consolidation

  11. Section 1404 - Change of venue

    28 U.S.C. § 1404   Cited 28,366 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