In re Radmax, Ltd.

In re Radmax, Ltd.

Opinion

 [*287]  PER CURIAM:

Radmax, Ltd. ("Radmax"), petitions for a writ of mandamus directing the district court to transfer this case from the Marshall Division of the Eastern District of Texas to the Tyler Division of that district.¹ ] To obtain mandamus relief, Radmax must demonstrate that (1) it has "no other adequate means to attain the relief [it] desires,"² (2) the Tyler Division is a "clearly more convenient" venue than the Marshall Division, and (3) the district court's ruling to the contrary was a "clear abuse of discretion." In re Volkswagen of Am., Inc. ("Volkswagen II"), 545 F.3d 304, 311 (5th Cir. 2008) (en banc). ] If Radmax makes that showing, and we are satisfied that "the writ is appropriate under the circumstances," we may exercise  [**2] our discretion to grant mandamus relief. Id.

The venue transfer statute provides: ] "For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it  [*288]  might have been brought or to any district or division to which all parties have consented." 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). ] The § 1404(a) factors apply as much to transfers between divisions of the same district as to transfers from one district to another.³ HN7] A motion to transfer venue pursuant to § 1404(a) should be granted if "the movant demonstrates that the transferee venue is clearly more convenient," taking into consideration (1) "the relative ease of access to sources of proof"; (2) "the availability of compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses"; (3) "the cost of attendance for willing witnesses"; (4) "all other practical problems that make trial of a case easy, expeditious and inexpensive";  [**4] (5) "the administrative difficulties flowing from court congestion"; (6) "the local interest in having localized interests decided at home"; (7) "the familiarity of the forum with the law that will govern the case"; and (8) "the avoidance of unnecessary problems of conflict of laws [or in] the application of foreign law".⁴ Volkswagen II, 545 F.3d at 315.

Applying those eight factors, the district court concluded that five were neutral, one was inapplicable, one "weigh[ed] against transfer," and one weighed "slightly" in favor of a transfer. After "balanc[ing] . . . the relevant factors," the district court ruled that "Radmax ha[d] not shown that the Tyler Division is clearly more convenient than the Marshall Division" and correspondingly denied the motion to transfer.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.