Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-02679/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-02679-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201 Fair Labor Standards Act

---

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 06cv2679 BTM(AJB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FERNANDO OBLITAS-RIOS, on behalf

of himself and all others similarly

situated,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 06cv2679 BTM(AJB)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

TRANSFER VENUE

vs.

PFIZER, INC., a California Corporation;

and DOES 1-100, inclusive,

Defendants.

Defendant Pfizer, Inc. has filed a motion to transfer this case to the Southern District

of New York pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). In the alternative, Defendant seeks a stay of

this action pending related litigation in the Southern District of New York. 

“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). In determining whether transfer is

appropriate in a particular case, courts consider factors such as (1) the plaintiff’s

choice of forum, (2) the convenience of the witnesses and parties, (3) the ease of

access to sources of proof, (4) the respective parties’ contacts with the forum, (5) the

contacts relating to the plaintiff’s cause of action in the chosen forum, (6) the

differences in the costs of litigation in the two forums, (7) the state that is most familiar

with the governing law, and (8) the availability of compulsory process to compel

attendance of unwilling non-party witnesses. Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc., 211

Case 3:06-cv-02679-BTM-AJB Document 11 Filed 05/21/07 Page 1 of 2
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 06cv2679 BTM(AJB)

F.3d 495, 498-99 (9th Cir. 2000); Decker Coal Co. v. Commonwealth Edison Co., 805

F.2d 834, 843 (9th Cir. 1986). 

This action could have been brought in the Southern District of New York as

Defendant’s principal place of business is in New York, New York. Defendant’s

primary argument for transferring the case is that a substantially similar case, Coultrip,

et al. v. Pfizer, Inc., is pending before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein in the Southern

District of New York. Coultrip, like this action, alleges that Defendant violated the

FLSA and state law (including California wage and hour law) by misclassifying

pharmaceutical sales representatives as exempt employees. The purported

“California class” in Coultrip is substantially the same as the purported class in this

action. Also pending before Judge Hellerstein is a related case, Jeter v. Pfizer, Inc.,

which pertains to Defendant’s alleged failure to pay certain wages to sales

representatives in violation of New York Labor Law. The Coultrip litigants have been

engaged in discovery regarding class certification issues for the past few months, and

briefing on the class certification will commence at the end of June. 

Plaintiff has filed a statement of non-opposition to Defendant’s motion to

transfer venue. In light of Plaintiff’s non-opposition, the overlapping issues in this case

and the Coultrip action, and the fact that Defendant’s corporate headquarters are in

New York (causing many corporate documents and witnesses to be located in New

York), the Court is satisfied that a transfer of venue is justified.

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion to transfer venue, and

DENIES AS MOOT Defendant’s motion to stay the action. This case is hereby

TRANSFERRED to the Southern District of New York. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 21, 2007

Hon. Barry Ted Moskowitz

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-02679-BTM-AJB Document 11 Filed 05/21/07 Page 2 of 2