Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

E.D. Tex.

Intravisual Inc. v. Fujitsu Microelectronics America, Inc., et al, No. 2:10-cv-00090 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 20, 2011)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:10-cv-00090, Dkt. No. 231
Decided
September 20, 2011
Judge
T. John Ward, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES the Moving Defendants motions to transfer to the Northern District of California or Southern District of California. (Dkt. Nos. 181 & 187)
Length
5 pages

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Before the Court are the Moving Defendants‟ 1 motions to transfer venue to the United States District Court for the Southern District of California or the Northern District of California. (Dkt. Nos. 181 & 187.) The Court, having considered the venue motions and the arguments of counsel, DENIES the motions to transfer venue . As will be discussed below, the Moving Defendants have not met the threshold burden of showing that either transferee venue is one where this suit could have been brought. See In re Volkswagen of Am., Inc.