Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-01645/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-01645-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Conversion

---

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 

07 CV 1645

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

E-TICKETS SOFTWARE, INC., a California

corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

NEW YEARS NATION, LLC, a New York

Domestic Limited Liability Company; JANN

YOGMAN, an individual, 

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 07 CV 1645 BEN JMA 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE 

Defendants New Year’s Nation, LLC (incorrectly named as New Years Nation, LLC) and Jann

Yogman (“Defendants”) filed a Motion to Dismiss Action for Improper Venue or, in the Alternative,

to Transfer Venue (“Motion”) with this Court on October 17, 2007. Plaintiff E-Tickets Software, Inc.

(“Plaintiff”) has not opposed the Motion. Defendants asked the Court to dismiss this action or to

transfer it to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, where there is a related case

pending. The Court agrees with Defendants that New York is a proper venue for this case and orders

the present action to be transferred to the Southern District of New York. 

In support of their Motion, Defendants attached a copy of the complaint they filed against

Plaintiff in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on July 31, 2007. Plaintiff

filed the present action with this Court against Defendants nearly a month later – on August 20, 2007.

Case 3:07-cv-01645-BEN-JMA Document 10 Filed 11/13/07 Page 1 of 3
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

 2 

07 CV 1645

“There is a generally recognized doctrine of federal comity which permits a district court to decline

jurisdiction over an action when a complaint involving the same parties and issues has already been

filed in another district.” Pacesetter Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc., 678 F.2d 93, 95 (9th Cir. 1982)

(citations omitted). Because the July 31, 2007 action involves the same parties, this case must be

transferred to the Southern District of New York, where the previously filed related case is pending.

Furthermore, in support of their Motion, Defendants attached a declaration indicating that an

earlier agreement between the parties contains a forum selection clause providing that “any action,

demand, claim or counterclaim relating to the terms and provisions of this Agreement, or to its

breach, shall be commenced in New York in a stage or federal district court of competent

jurisdiction.” See Yogman Decl. Ex. B ¶ 4, Docket Entry No. 9.2. Plaintiff failed to file an

opposition to Defendants’ Motion or to dispute the validity of this agreement. The Court, therefore,

presumes that the forum selection clause in this agreement is valid. “[A] freely negotiated private . .

. agreement, unaffected by fraud, undue influence, or overweening bargaining power, such as that

involved here, should be given full effect.” Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute, 499 U.S. 585, 591

(1991) (quotations and citations omitted). The forum selection clause provides that the parties must

resolve their disputes in New York. Accordingly, this lawsuit was improperly brought before this

Court.

Finally, Defendants’ unopposed Motion indicates that a transfer to the Southern District of

New York is necessary for the convenience of the parties and witnesses. It appears that a number of

Defendants’ witnesses are present in New York; that the contract was negotiated, at least in part, in

New York; that the actions leading to the dispute and the present lawsuit occurred in New York; and

that at least one Defendant is a New York resident. These factors further weight in favor of a

transfer.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue is GRANTED, and

this action is transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and 

///

///

///

Case 3:07-cv-01645-BEN-JMA Document 10 Filed 11/13/07 Page 2 of 3
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

 3 

07 CV 1645

consolidated with the earlier filed, related case, no. 07-CV-06876-NRB.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 13, 2007

Hon. Roger T. Benitez

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-01645-BEN-JMA Document 10 Filed 11/13/07 Page 3 of 3