- 1 - 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

MEDLIANT INC.,

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

KATRINA PONCE DE LEON, 

 Defendant. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. 1:23–cv–00203–MAC

MEDLIANT INC.’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF CORRECTION

On September 11, 2023, Defendant moved to dismiss on the grounds of forum non 

conveniens and for failure to state a claim. See Doc. 8. Relevant to the forum non conveniens 

portion of the Motion, Defendant alleged the forum-selection clause in the Agreement for 

Employment by and between Plaintiff and Defendant dated January 18, 2022 (the “Agreement”) 

was mandatory and that the public interest factors weighed in favor of dismissal. See id. at 

PageID ##31–35. Specifically, Defendant alleged the second and third public interest factors 

weighed in favor of dismissal because, in part, Defendant “is now a Florida resident.” See id. at

PageID #34. Defendant further alleged the public interest factors weighed in favor of dismissal 

because “[n]either party is at home in Texas and the local interest in Nevada is greater than the 

local interest in Texas to decide this controversy.” See id. 

On September 25, 2023, Plaintiff responded to the Motion asserting the Agreement’s 

forum-selection clause was permissive, not mandatory. See Doc. 10, PageID ##332–35. 

Alternatively, Plaintiff asserted the Court should still deny the Motion because the public interest 

factors, including the local interest factor, weighed against dismissal. See id. PageID #337.

Case 1:23-cv-00203-MAC Document 21 Filed 10/25/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 1257
- 2 -

On October 10, 2023, Defendant replied in further support of its Motion. See Doc. 13. 

Relevant to the issue of forum non conveniens, Defendant again asserted the forum-selection 

clause was mandatory and that the public interest factors, including the local interest factor,

favored dismissal. See id. at PageID #799. Specifically, Defendant represented that Defendant

“lives in Florida, meaning that none of the parties to this action reside in Texas.” See id.

Defendant went a step further stating that any concern about travel to Nevada for Defendant was 

“misplaced” because “she now lives in Florida, from which she can book a direct flight to Las 

Vegas but not to Beaumont.” See id. fn. 3. 

As of October 20, 2023, when Plaintiff filed its Sur-Reply, Plaintiff was still under the 

mistaken impression that Defendant lived in Florida. See Doc. 16, PageID #1047 (“The fact that 

Defendant may have relocated to Florida is of no consequence as it is undisputed Defendant 

resided in this District when the cause of action arose.”). 

On October 24, 2023, counsel for Plaintiff learned that Defendant lived in Beaumont, not 

Florida. Counsel for Plaintiff asked counsel for Defendant to confirm, which counsel for 

Defendant did by email and again in the Notice of Correction wherein Defendant asks the Court 

to “disregard the references to Defendant’s location.” See Doc. 19.

Notwithstanding the Defendant’s Notice, Defendant’s residence should not be 

disregarded. If this Court determines the forum-selection clause is mandatory (which it should 

not for the reasons detailed in the Response and Sur-Reply), Defendant’s residence is extremely 

relevant to the local interest factor, which already weighed heavily against dismissal. See Doc. 

16, PageID #1047. Now, this factor even more so weighs against dismissal since the trial of this 

case would take place within a few miles of Defendant’s home, where Defendant worked, and 

where the cause of action arose.

Case 1:23-cv-00203-MAC Document 21 Filed 10/25/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 1258
- 3 - 

For these reasons, this Court should consider Defendant’s Beaumont residence in 

connection with its resolution of the Motion should the Court determine the forum-selection 

clause is mandatory. 

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ R. Brandon Bundren

R. Brandon Bundren

Texas Bar No. 24050353

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

1600 Division Street, Suite 700

Nashville, Tennessee 37203

P: 615.252.4647 

F: 615.248.3047 

bbundren@bradley.com

Attorney for Medliant Inc.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on October 25, 2023, I electronically filed a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing with the Clerk of Court for the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, through 

the Court’s Electronic Case Filing system, which will serve all counsel of record listed below: 

David H. Seligman (pro hac vice)

Email: david@towardsjustice.org

Rachel Williams Dempsey (pro hac vice)

Email: rachel@towardsjustice.org

Juno Turner (pro hac vice)

Email: juno@towardsjustice.org

TOWARDS JUSTICE

Attorneys for Defendant

/s/ R. Brandon Bundren

R. Brandon Bundren

Case 1:23-cv-00203-MAC Document 21 Filed 10/25/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 1259