Good Technology Corporation v. MobileIron, Inc., C.A. No. 14-1308-LPS-CJB, March 27, 2015

Burke, M. J.  Defendant’s motion to transfer to the Northern District of California is granted.

A transfer motion is treated as a non-dispositive motion.  The parties are already engaged in litigation in California, the United Kingdom and Germany.  The court does not apply the first-filed rule questioning the application of that rule where the litigation involved different patents albeit related technology.  Plaintiff’s choice of forum, where both parties are incorporated, weighs against transfer.  Defendant’s forum preference, where its principal place of business is located, weighs in favor of transfer.  The third Jumara factor, where the claim arose, weighs in favor of transfer because, despite the nationwide market, a significant portion of the acts giving rise to the claims of infringement have a far stronger connection to California.  The convenience of the parties weighs only slightly in favor of transfer despite the fact that both parties are headquartered in California.  Defendant is a global company and can hardly complain of being inconvenienced by litigating in the state where it is incorporated.  The convenience of the witnesses factor also weighs in favor of transfer.  The location of books and records factor also weighs slightly in favor of transfer.  With respect to the public interest factors, this case would likely be considered related to the pending litigation in California, and the judge there is familiar with the field of technology implicated if not the precise technology.  This factor favors transfer.  Administrative difficulties getting the case to trial is a neutral factor, as are the local interest and public policy factors.