United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Marshall Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
PAVNE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Technology, Inc. (“ATI”) accuses Silver Spring
Networks, Inc. (“Silver Spring”) of infringing
United States Patent Nos. 5, 986, 574 and 6, 509, 841, both
of which generally relate to automated technology for reading
utility meters. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 13-20,
ECF No. 49. Silver Spring moves to change venue to the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California
under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Def.'s Venue Mot., ECF
No. 32. For the following reasons, Silver Spring's motion
a Massachusetts corporation headquartered in East Boston,
Massachusetts. Bassiouni Decl. ¶ 3, February 2, 2017,
ECF No. 48-1. ATI does not have employees or a place of
business in Texas, other than a registered agent for service
of process in Dallas, Texas. See Collins Decl.
¶ 8, Sept. 29, 2016, ECF No. 32-2. ATI does, however,
market, sell, and maintain emergency notification warning
systems in Texas and within the Eastern District of Texas.
Bassiouni Decl. ¶¶ 5-6. As a result, ATI has
generated sales and paid Texas franchise taxes. Id.
¶ 8. ATI does not do business in California.
Id. ¶ 10.
Spring is a Delaware corporation that has been headquartered
in Northern California since 2003, first in Redwood City,
California and more recently in San Jose, California.
Dresselhuys Decl. ¶ 3, Nov. 3, 2016, ECF No. 32-1.
Members of Silver Spring's leadership team and employees
with technical knowledge of Silver Spring's products live
and work in Northern California, with the exception of one
Vice President who lives and works from his home in Fairhope,
Alabama. Id. ¶¶ 4-12. Silver Spring
maintains product records and unreleased prototypes at its
headquarters in San Jose. Id. ¶ 14. Aside from
one Silver Spring field employee who works one day per week
from his home in Lewisville, Texas, Silver Spring does not
have any employees, documents, assets, or offices in the
district. Id. ¶ 17. Silver Spring's only
physical presence in Texas is a facility in San Antonio and
the 37 employees that work there. Def.'s Interrog. Resp.
6, ECF No. 48-11.
district court can transfer a case to another district where
the case might have been brought for “the convenience
of parties and witnesses” and “in the interests
of justice.” 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Transfer of a
case serves the interests of justice if the party seeking a
change of venue shows the transferee district to be
“clearly more convenient” than the transferor
district. In re Volkswagen of Am., Inc., 545 F.3d
304, 315 (5th Cir. 2008) (“Volkswagen
II”). Public and private interest factors guide
the analysis. In re Volkswagen AG, 371 F.3d 201, 203
(5th Cir. 2004) (“Volkswagen I”). The
private factors include:
(1) ease of access to evidence (“sources of
(2) subpoena power over potential witnesses;
(3) cost of attendance for willing witnesses; and
(4) other practical problems.
Volkswagen II, 545 F.3d at 315. The public factors
(1) administrative difficulties flowing from court