Panagene, Inc v Bio-Synthesis, Inc, No. 2:14-cv-00034 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 24, 2015)

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 is Bio-Synt hesis, Inc.’s (“BSI”) Motion to Transfer Venue to the Sherman Division of the Eastern District of Texas (Dkt. 8, the “Motion”). The Motion begins by implying that venue is improper in the Marshall division, citing the forum non conveniens doctrine, but does not address that issue in any detail. (Mot. at 4.) Instead, the briefing focuses on BSI’s contentions that the case should be transferred “for the convenience of the parties and the witnesses” under 28 U. S.C. §1404, and thus the Court will focus its analysis accordingly.