Good Technology Corporation, et al. v. Airwatch, LLC, C.A. No. 13-473-LPS-CJB, January 21, 2015.

Burke, M. J. Report and recommendation that defendant’s motion to transfer be granted. Pretrial matters such as scheduling, dismissal and transfer were referred to the magistrate on September 2, 2014.  The motion was filed on October 31, 2014.

There is a split of authority as to whether a transfer motion is dispositive or non-dispositive, the most recent authority in this district indicating it is non-dispositive. The court treats it as dispositive out of caution. There is no dispute the litigation could have been brought in Georgia, where defendant has its principal place of business. Plaintiff’s choice of forum because it is incorporated in Delaware and has litigated in this forum weighs against transfer. Defendant’s reasons for seeking transfer weight in favor of transfer.  These include the fact that it is headquartered in Georgia and many witnesses and documents are located there. The third and fourth Jumara factors – where the claim arose, and the convenience of parties – weigh in favor of transfer. The convenience of the witnesses factor is neutral. The location of books and records factor weighs only slightly in favor of transfer. The first two public interest factors (enforceability of judgment, practical considerations) are neutral. As for administrative difficulties getting the case to trial, this factor weighs only slightly in favor of transfer.  The Georgia court is less congested, but the judge’s new scheduling practices will likely speed the average time to trial.  The local interest factor is neutral, and Delaware’s policy of encouraging the Delaware forum for Delaware corporations to resolve business disputes is given minimal weight disfavoring transfer.