AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

USA NUTRITIONALS, INC., Plaintiff, v. INNOVATIVE LABS, LLC, et al., Defendants.

ORDER

LEWIS A. KAPLAN, United States District Judge.

Defendants move, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), to transfer this trademark infringement action to the Eastern District of New York.

All of the parties to this action are based in the Eastern District of New York, the plaintiff in Deer Park and the defendants in Hauppauge. All therefore are located close to the new Eastern District courthouse in Central Islip. Quite clearly, this action could have been brought in the Eastern District and the convenience of the parties would be served by litigating in Central Islip. The deference ordinarily shown to a plaintiff's choice of forum is undercut here by the fact that plaintiff chose a forum other than that in which its headquarters is based, particularly given its apparent lack of any regular place of business in this district. Moreover, the principal significant source of non-party witnesses identified to the Court, the Family Dollar Stores, is based in North Carolina and thus would find trial, assuming that its witnesses voluntarily come to New York to testify, in either location of virtually equal convenience or inconvenience, as the case may be.

Accordingly, the motion is granted and the case transferred to the Eastern District of New York. In doing so, the Court acts on the premise that the case will be assigned to Central Islip.

SO ORDERED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

USA NUTRITIONALS, INC. v. INNOVATIVE LABS, LLC (S.D.N.Y. 2001)
(Dec 3, 2001)