Opinion ID: 2733581
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Pappases’ Motion for Reconsideration

Text: After the district court dismissed the complaint, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Atlantic Marine Construction Co. v. United States District Court, 571 U.S. __, 134 S. Ct. 568 (2013). In that case, the Supreme Court declared that a motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens, and not a Rule 12(b)(3) motion for improper venue, is the appropriate means to enforce a valid forum-selection clause if that clause requires the dispute to be litigated in a non-federal forum. Id. at 580.2 Additionally, the Supreme Court set forth a modified version of the forum non conveniens doctrine applicable in cases where there is a valid forum-selection 2 The Supreme Court reasoned that Rule 12(b)(3) provides for dismissal only when venue is wrong or “improper” pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), which sets forth three bases for venue. 134 S. Ct. at 577. So long as venue complies with § 1391, a district court may not dismiss a complaint under Rule 12(b)(3), regardless of whether a forum-selection clause requires a different forum. Id. at 578. The Supreme Court also noted that, when a forum-selection clause requires a different federal forum, the clause should be enforced through a motion to transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), which the Supreme Court described as “a codification of the doctrine of forum non conveniens for the subset of cases in which the transferee forum is within the federal court system.” Id. at 580. 5 Case: 14-11098 Date Filed: 09/17/2014 Page: 6 of 13 clause in a contract. Id. at 581–83. Under that version, the burden is on the plaintiff to show that dismissal of the complaint is unwarranted, and a court may weigh only public interest factors in determining if a plaintiff has met this burden. See id. The Pappases filed a motion for reconsideration in light of Atlantic Marine. Without a response from Kerzner, the district court granted the Pappases’ motion and vacated its order dismissing the complaint insofar as it ruled that the valid forum-selection clause justified dismissal for improper venue. The district court allowed the parties to brief the issue of whether the forum-selection clause could be enforced under the modified forum non conveniens doctrine set forth in Atlantic Marine.