Opinion ID: 4196342
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: The desire to avoid forum shopping.

Text: We next ask whether Montanore attempted to forum shop by filing in federal court. Nakash v. Marciano, 882 F.2d 1411, 1417 (9th Cir. 1989). If Montanore “pursued suit in a new forum after facing setbacks in the original proceeding,” this factor may weigh in favor of a stay. Seneca Ins. Co., 862 F.3d at 846. In Nakash, for example, this factor MONTANORE MINERALS V. BAKIE 17 strongly weighed in favor of a stay when, after litigating for three and a half years in state court, the plaintiffs “[a]pparently . . . . [became] dissatisfied with the state court and [sought] a new forum for their claims” by filing in federal court. 882 F.2d at 1417. This case goes further than Nakash. After six years of litigation, Montanore filed in federal court a few months after it received an unfavorable decision in state court. Although it did not bring the exact same claim in federal court, the federal proceeding was aimed at the same goal. We can reasonably infer that Montanore was seeking to avoid the state court judge whose rulings it repeatedly characterized as wrong in its appellate briefing, and whom it unsuccessfully sought to have removed from the case under Montana law. This factor therefore favors a stay.