Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-02833/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-02833-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 47:0227(b)(3) Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991

---

1

16cv2833 JM (JMA)

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TREVER DECLUE and KATHERINE 

DECLUE, individually and on behalf of 

those similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

UNITED CONSUMER FINANCIAL 

SERVICES COMPANY,

Defendant.

Case No.: 16cv2833 JM (JMA)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S 

MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE

Defendant United Consumer Financial Services Company (“Defendant”) moves the 

court to transfer this action to the Northern District of Ohio pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). 

(Doc. No. 42.) Plaintiffs Trever and Katherine DeClue (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) do not 

oppose Defendant’s motion. (Doc. Nos. 52, 53.) 

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), the court may transfer an action to any other district or 

division where it might have been brought “[f]or the convenience of the parties and 

witnesses and in the interest of justice.” Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. McDonnell 

Douglas Corp, 820 F.Supp. 503, 506 (C.D. Cal. 1992). Here, the court concludes that, on 

balance, a venue transfer is warranted under the circumstances to promote the fair and 

efficient resolution of Plaintiffs’ claims. The action could have originally been brought in 

Case 3:16-cv-02833-JM-JMA Document 54 Filed 02/21/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

16cv2833 JM (JMA)

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

the Northern District of Ohio because it is the judicial district in which Defendant resides. 

See 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(1). Although Plaintiffs resided in this district when they filed their 

complaint, they have since moved to St. Louis, Missouri. (Doc. No. 42, Exh. 3.) As a 

result, no party or witness is located in this district, and the majority of witnesses are located 

in the Northern District of Ohio, making it the more convenient forum. Finally, Plaintiffs 

do not oppose transferring this action to the Northern District of Ohio. 

Accordingly, the court grants Defendant’s motion. The Clerk of Court is directed to 

transfer this action to the United States District Court of the Northern District of Ohio. The 

motion hearing currently set for Monday, March 5, 2018, is vacated. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 21, 2018 

JEFFREY T. MILLER

United States District Judge

Case 3:16-cv-02833-JM-JMA Document 54 Filed 02/21/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2