DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
A motion for a change of venue pursuant to CPLR 510(3) based upon the convenience of the witnesses must (1) set forth the names, addresses, and occupations of the prospective witnesses, (2) disclose the facts as to which the proposed witnesses will testify, (3) state whether the witnesses are willing to testify, and (4) explain how these witnesses would be inconvenienced should a change of venue be denied (see, McGarry v. Columbia Greene Med. Ctr., 260 A.D.2d 451; O'Brien v. Vassar Bros. Hosp., 207 A.D.2d 169). The defendants' submissions failed to satisfy all of the required elements. In addition, all of the witnesses mentioned by the defendants were either the individual defendants themselves, or their employees, whose convenience is not a factor in considering a change of venue based on CPLR 510(3) (see, Rollinson v. Pergament Acquisition Corp., 228 A.D.2d 186; Flynn v. Niagra Univ., 198 A.D.2d 262). Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendants' cross motion.