Daka Research Inc. v. Shenzhen Bali Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. Storefront
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:22-cv-03150
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Daka Research v. Shenzhen Bali, Judge Caproni denied defendants’ motion to dismiss and transfer without prejudice because they lacked the required affidavit.
Daka Research Inc. and defendants Shenzhen Bali Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. Storefront and bad87hs Storefront; the defendants may re-file the motion with the required affidavit.
What happened
Daka Research Inc. sued Shenzhen Bali Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. Storefront and bad87hs Storefront. The defendants asked to move the case to the Southern District of Florida, partly to make the case more convenient for the parties and witnesses.
The court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss and transfer without prejudice because they did not provide an affidavit with detailed facts supporting the requested transfer. The court ordered the defendants to file the motion again with an appropriate affidavit by September 6, 2022, and set deadlines for Daka Research’s response and the defendants’ reply.
Judge Valerie Caproni issued the order on August 24, 2022.
The detailed version
- Daka Research Inc. v. Shenzhen Bali Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. Storefront · No. 1:22-cv-03150
- Valerie Caproni
- Aug. 24, 2022
Background
The defendants moved under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to transfer the action to the Southern District of Florida. They argued in part that the transfer would improve convenience for the parties and witnesses.
Court’s reasoning
Judge Caproni explained that a motion seeking transfer for the convenience of parties and witnesses must include an affidavit containing detailed factual statements showing why the proposed receiving court would be more convenient. The defendants did not submit such an affidavit.
Disposition
The court denied without prejudice the defendants’ motion to dismiss and transfer the action. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the pending motion at Docket
- The defendants were ordered to re-file the motion with an appropriate affidavit by September 6,
- Daka Research’s response was due September 20, 2022, and the defendants’ reply was due September 27,
- The order does not decide the underlying claims or whether transfer should ultimately be granted.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.