United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Marshall Division
PAYNE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
the Court is Defendant Mary Moore's Motion to Transfer
Venue (“Motion to Transfer”). (Dkt. No. 9.) This
Motion to Transfer seeks to transfer this case from the
Marshall Division to the Tyler Division pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1404(a) for the convenience of the parties.
(Id.) After consideration, the Court concludes that
Defendant has failed to meet her burden of showing that the
Tyler Division would be clearly more convenient than the
Marshall Division. Consequently, the Court
DENIES this Motion to Transfer.
the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of
justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to
any other district or division where it might have been
brought or to any district or division to which all parties
have consented.” 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). The Court
concludes that this case could have been brought in the Tyler
Division, so the Court will therefore focus on the issue of
whether that venue was a clearly more convenient forum. To
determine whether venue transfer is appropriate under §
1404(a), the Fifth Circuit has adopted several public and
private interest factors. In re Volkswagen of Am.,
Inc., 545 F.3d 304, 315 (5th Cir. 2008)
(“Volkswagen II”). The public interest
factors include (1) the administrative difficulties flowing
from court congestion; (2) the local interest in having
localized interests decided at home; (3) the familiarity of
the forum with the law that will govern the case; and (4) the
avoidance of unnecessary problems of conflict of laws.
Id. The private interest factors include (1) the
relative ease of access to sources of proof; (2) the
availability of compulsory process to secure the attendance
of witnesses; (3) the cost of attendance for willing
witnesses; and (4) all other practical problems that make
trial of a case easy, expeditious, and inexpensive.
plaintiff's choice of venue is not an express factor in
the analysis. Seven Networks, LLC v. Google LLC,
2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146375, at *8 (citing Volkswagen
II, 545 F.3d at 315). However, a moving defendant must
demonstrate that the proposed venue is clearly more
convenient than the original venue. Id. (citing
Volkswagen II, 545 F.3d at 315). By applying this
heightened standard, the plaintiff's choice of forum is
given the appropriate deference. Id. (citing
Volkswagen II, 545 F.3d at 315).
has not sufficiently shown that these factors weigh in favor
of a transfer. The Court concludes that the administrative
difficulties factor is neutral. The local interest in having
localized interests decided at home weighs only slightly in
favor of transfer - Defendant only indicates that the
accident occurred in Smith County, but Defendant does not
offer any further facts to show why the Tyler Division would
have a strong localized interest in this case. The factor of
“familiarity of the forum with the law that will govern
the case” is neutral as both divisions are well suited
to handle this case. Similarly, the factor of “the
avoidance of unnecessary problems of conflict of laws”
is neutral as Defendant has not identified any conflict of
laws issues for either division.
to the private interest factors, Defendant has not identified
any specific sources of proof that will be required in this
case. Without pointing to any specific source of proof that
will be required, Defendant has not shown that any source of
proof will be difficult to transport. Furthermore, Plaintiff
points out that he has sought medical care from doctors in
Shreveport, Louisiana and Bossier City, Louisiana. (Dkt. No.
9 at 7-8.) These doctors will likely have records that are
relevant to this action and that would be more easily
transported to the Marshall Division. Accordingly, the Court
concludes that this factor is neutral at best for Defendant.
“cost of attendance of willing witnesses, ”
Defendant focuses solely on the increased inconvenience for
her if this case were to proceed in the Marshall Division.
However, Plaintiff resides on Bossier City, Louisiana, which
is much closer to the Marshall Division. Thus, a transfer
from the Marshall Division to the Tyler Division would merely
shift the inconvenience from Defendant to Plaintiff, which is
insufficient to show that a transfer is warranted.
Mohamed v. Mazda Motor Corp., 90 F.Supp.2d 757, 775
(E.D. Tex. 2000). Furthermore, Defendant fails to
specifically identify any additional witnesses other than
herself and Plaintiff. By contrast, Plaintiff indicates that
he will seek testimony from his medical providers, who are
located in Bossier City, Louisiana and Shreveport, Louisiana.
(Dkt. No. 9at 7.) The Court therefore concludes that this
factor weighs against transfer.
remaining private interest factors are neutral at best.
Defendant has not identified any witnesses for whom
compulsory process would not be available in Marshall
Division, making the “availability of compulsory
process” factor neutral at best for Defendant.
Additionally, Defendant argues that the factor of
“other practical problems” weighs in favor of
transfer because “no possibility of delay
exists.” However, even assuming this is true, this
would merely mean that this factor is neutral. Thus, the
Court concludes that the “other practical
problems” factor is neutral.
all of the factors together, Defendant has failed to meet her
burden of showing that the Tyler Division would be clearly
more convenient than the Marshall Division. ...