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

E.D. Tex.

Lubricote, LLC v. Lumenis BE Ltd., No. 2:25-cv-00650 (E.D. Tex. July 13, 2026)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:25-cv-00650, Dkt. No. 52
Decided
July 13, 2026
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (Motion(s)31 terminated)
Length
9 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 is Defendant’s Motion to Transfer to the Central District of California Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) (“Motion”). (Dkt. No. 31.) Defendant requests the Court to transfer the above- captioned patent case for the convenience of the parties and witnesses . Defendant urges that the Central District of California ( “CDCA”) would be more convenient because Plaintiff is based there. However, Defendant is an Israeli corporation. Defendant itself does not appear to have any connection to CDCA.