Court Transfers Cases to Northern District of California

Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG v. Lattice Semiconductor Corp., C.A. Nos. 14-1375 – LPS- CJB; Papst Licensing GmBH & Co. KG v. Xilinx Inc., C.A. No. 14-1376 – LPS- CJB; Papst Licensing GmBH & Co. KG v. Altera Corporation, C.A. No. 15-162 – LPS- CJB, September 1, 2015.

Burke, M. J.  Memorandum order granting defendants’ motion to transfer.

The defendants in three related cases moved for transfer towards the Northern District of California where two various other cases were pending.  The motions were granted.  A Legal Court discovered that the only real Jumara factor weighing against transfer is plaintiff’s selection of forum.  Even though the defendants are Delaware companies, their particular principal places of economic are situated in California together with the majority of the witnesses and relevant documents (such as the books and records) and software.  The alleged direct violation also happened for the reason that forum.  The benefit towards the parties of litigating within the two different forums weighs in at neutral however the convenience to witnesses favors the defendants’ choice.  Additionally, it could be less costly to litigate in California.  Administrative difficulties don’t favor either party however the local interest favors California.