Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 2:15-cv-00621 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 9, 2016)

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 Defendant Apple Inc.’s (“Apple”) Motion to Transfer Venue from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern Distri ct of California (Dkt. N o. 22). Apple argues that this case should be transferred to the Northern Di strict of California. Plaintiff Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC (“Parthenon”) opposes tran sfer. After considering the evidence and weighing the factors, the Court finds that Apple has not shown this case should be transferred.