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 - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

PACTOOL INTERNATIONAL LTD., 

Plaintiff,

v.

KETT TOOL COMPANY, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. C06-5367BHS

 ORDER GRANTING 

 PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

 FOR RECONSIDERATION 

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff PacTool International Ltd.’s

(“PacTool”) motion for reconsideration (Dkt. 96) of the Court’s order (Dkt. 90) on

Defendants Kett Tool Company, Inc.’s (“Kett”) and H. Rowe Hoffman’s (“Hoffman”)

Motion to Dismiss or Transfer (Dkt. 75). The Court has considered the pleadings filed in

support of and in opposition to the motion and the remainder of the file and hereby grants 

the motion for the reasons stated herein.

 The instant action was filed on June 29, 2006. Dkt. 1. In December of 2007, Kett 

requested reexamination of the patents-in-suit in the United States Patent and Trademark

Office. See Dkt. 30. On February 1, 2008, the Court granted Kett’s request for a stay of

this litigation until the reexamination procedures were completed. Dkt. 39. The

reexamination proceedings were terminated in December of 2009 and the stay was

terminated on December 18, 2009. See Dkt. 48. On April 1, 2010, the Court granted

Plaintiff PacTool International Ltd.’s (“PacTool”) motion to amend its complaint to add

Hoffman as a Defendant. Dkt. 61.

Case 3:06-cv-05367-BHS Document 103 Filed 08/25/10 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

ORDER - 2

This is a patent case arising under federal patent law. See generally Dkt. 63. This

Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over the action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§

1331 (federal question jurisdiction) and 1338(a) (an Act of Congress governing patent

cases). PacTool’s amended complaint alleges that Defendants have been and are

infringing – directly, contributorily and/or by inducement – technology contained in

patents owned by PacTool by manufacturing, using, selling and/or offering for sale

products that infringe such technology. Dkt. 63 at 3-6. The products at issue contain

fiber-cement cutting technology that PacTool maintains is protected by its patents. Id. at

2. 

On April 26, 2010, Defendants filed their motion requesting the Court to dismiss

or transfer this action for improper venue, or in the alternative, to transfer this action to

the Southern District of Ohio pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404. Dkt. 75. Further, Hoffman

requested that the Court dismiss or transfer the causes of action against him for lack of

personal jurisdiction and/or for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 

Id. On June 30, 2010, the Court issued an order granting in part and denying in part

Defendants’ motion and transferred the case to the Southern District of Ohio. Dkt. 90. 

On July 8, 2010, Defendants filed a statement noting the death of Defendant Hoffman. 

Dkt. 94. On July 14, 2010, PacTool filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court’s

order transferring the case. Dkt. 96. 

PacTool’s motion for reconsideration of the Court’s order is limited to the Court’s

decision to transfer the case to the Southern District of Ohio. See generally Dkt. 96. The

Court concludes that in light of the death of Defendant Hoffman and the Court’s

reconsideration of its weighing of the Jones factors, specifically PacTool’s choice of

forum, the Court concludes that the interests of justice weigh against transfer of this case.

to the Southern District of Ohio. See Jones v. BNC Franchising, Inc., 211 F.3d 495, 498-

99 (9th Cir. 2000); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). 

Case 3:06-cv-05367-BHS Document 103 Filed 08/25/10 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

ORDER - 3

Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that PacTool’s motion for reconsideration 

(Dkt. 96) is GRANTED and the Court’s order on Defendants’ motion to transfer or

dismiss (Dkt. 90) is VACATED to the extent that it transfered this case to the Southern

District of Ohio. PacTool’s pending motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. 59 ) is

hereby noted for August 23, 2010. 

DATED this 25th day of August, 2010.

A 

BENJAMIN H. SETTLE

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05367-BHS Document 103 Filed 08/25/10 Page 3 of 3