Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-04216/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-04216-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 380
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Property Damage
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Property Damage

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO TRANSFER CASE TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF

NEW MEXICO—No. C-05-04216 RMW

JAH

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

E-FILED on 7/11/06

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

MEDICAL AIR TRANSPORT, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

EADS FRANCE, S.A.S.; EUROCOPTER,

S.A.S; AMERICAN EUROCOPTER

CORPORATION, LLC f/k/a AMERICAN

EUROCOPTER; and DOES 1 through 50,

Defendants.

No. C-05-04216 RMW

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

TRANSFER CASE TO THE UNITED

STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

[Re Docket No. 8]

Plaintiff Medical Air Transport, Inc. moves to transfer this action to the District of New

Mexico. No hearing on this motion is necessary; the July 21, 2006 hearing date is vacated.

Medical Air alleges that a helicopter manufactured by the defendants crashed on October

19, 2001 near Roswell, New Mexico. Compl. ¶¶ 13, 19. Medical Air filed suit against the

defendants in the Northern District of California on October 18, 2005. On February 24, 2006,

Medical Air, which had not served any defendant, requested an additional sixty days to effect

service; Medical Air justified the request with the claim that "plaintiff's counsel is in the process

of referring the matter to counsel in New Mexico." The court gave Medical Air until April 25,

2006 to serve the defendants.

Case 5:05-cv-04216-RMW Document 10 Filed 07/11/06 Page 1 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

 That rule provides, in part, that a complaint may dismissed for failure to effect service by "the

court, upon motion or its own initiative after notice to the plaintiff."

2

 Plaintiff makes a passing request for this court to specify that the transfer is to be to the Roswell

branch of the District of New Mexico. However, according to the court's website, the court presence

in Roswell consists solely of a part-time magistrate judge. Any particular divisional assignment is

best left to the District of New Mexico.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO TRANSFER CASE TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF

NEW MEXICO—No. C-05-04216 RMW

JAH 2

To date, Medical Air has failed to serve any defendants. Medical Air is therefore

instructed, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m),1

 that the delay in serving defendants

which has already occurred, or further delay, may result in dismissal of its action upon motion of

the court or any defendant.

On May 10, 2006, Medical Air informed the court that it would file a motion to transfer

"within the next 30 days." On June 16, 2006, Medical Air filed the instant motion to transfer

under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), claiming that since the crash occurred in New Mexico, this action

should be transferred there.

The court has some concerns about Medical Air's handling of the case to date. Medical Air

does not explain why it filed this action in California and over half a year later seeks to have it

transferred to New Mexico without serving any defendant. The court has no evidence Medical Air

has engaged in this odd procedure for any improper motive, so will consider Medical Air's motion.

"For 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." 28

U.S.C. § 1404(a). Plaintiff alleges this court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 because the

helicopter was worth over $75,000, the plaintiff is a citizen of California and Nevada, and the

defendants are citizens of France, Texas, and Delaware. Compl. ¶¶ 1-5, 27. Plaintiff also alleges

in a conclusory fashion that the French defendants have "continuous and systematic business

contacts within the United States sufficient to subject [them] to this court's general personal

jurisdiction." Id. ¶¶ 2-3. Accepting the allegations of the complaint as true, it appears this action

is one that "might have been brought" in the District of New Mexico. See 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)

(emphasis added). As relevant witnesses are more likely to be in New Mexico, it would appear to

be "in the interest of justice" to transfer the action there. See id.

2

Case 5:05-cv-04216-RMW Document 10 Filed 07/11/06 Page 2 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO TRANSFER CASE TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF

NEW MEXICO—No. C-05-04216 RMW

JAH 3

ORDER

For the foregoing reasons, the court grants Medical Air's motion to transfer this action to

the District of New Mexico under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). This transfer is without prejudice to a sua

sponte motion to dismiss or a motion to dismiss by any defendant for failure to timely serve.

DATED: 7/11/06

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

Case 5:05-cv-04216-RMW Document 10 Filed 07/11/06 Page 3 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO TRANSFER CASE TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF

NEW MEXICO—No. C-05-04216 RMW

JAH 4

Notice of this document has been electronically sent to:

Counsel for Plaintiffs:

Daniel Joe De Vries DJDV@DeVriesLawGroup.com

Counsel for Defendants:

(none served)

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel that have not

registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program.

Dated: 7/11/06 /s/ JH

Chambers of Judge Whyte

Case 5:05-cv-04216-RMW Document 10 Filed 07/11/06 Page 4 of 4