Motion to transfer venue denied in later-filed patent case

Cummins-Allison Corp. v. Glory Ltd., 2004 WL 1635534 (E.D.Tex.2004) (NO. CIV.A. 2-03-CV-358TJ)
Judge: Ward
Division: Marshall
Date: May 26, 2004
Holding: Defendants' motion to transfer venue DENIED.
COMMENTS:
This is a patent infringement case with an unusual background. Since 2002 an action involving the same parties and related patents has been pending in Illinois. The Plaintiffs sought leave to amend their complaint in that action to add the patent now in the Texas case, and were denied leave, and told by the Illinois court that the additional patents should be the subject of a new action. They then filed this case in Texas. The Defendants then filed a declaratory judgment action in Illinois as to these patents, but the judge with that case deferred to the Texas judge (as the "first-filed" judge) the decision of whether the Texas action would proceed. The defendants then attempted to have their dec action consolidated into the existing Illinois action, but that judge again declined to add the new patents to the existing case.
Defendant then sought a transfer of the Texas case to Illinois. Judge Ward denied the motion, noting that the defendants had opposed the motion to add these patents into the Illinois action, and that the Illinois judge had repeatedly rejected the claim that trying the patents together would be more efficient. He then determined that the relevant public and private interest factors did not warrant a transfer.