Transfer is denied where jurisdiction is inappropriate as to 16 out of 19 defendant
Safety Braking Corp., et al. v. Six Flags Theme Parks Inc., et al., C.A. No. 07-127-JJF, June 9 , 2009.
Farnan, J. Defendants’ Motion to Transfer to the Central District of California is denied.
Plaintiffs allege infringement of two patents relating to magnetic braking systems. Plaintiffs are assignees of the patent-in-suit and are incorporated in Florida and Nevada. Defendants are operators of, or own interest in, amusement parks in various locations. All defendants are domiciled here. Defendants contend that because none of the alleged wrongful conduct occurred in Delaware and because neither plaintiff is a Delaware citizen, transfer of the action would not be inconvenient. In addition, related cases involving the principal parties to the instant litigations as well as the same technology have been consolidated and are presently pending in the Central District of California. Plaintiffs are also involved in other litigation in a California state court. Finally, none of the amusement parks at which the alleged patent infringement occurred are located in Delaware. The motion is denied given that as to the vast majority of Defendants (16 out of 19) there is a real question as to whether the action could have been commenced in the Central District of California.
