throbber
Case 2:12-cv-02767-JPM-tmp Document 47 Filed 03/11/13 Page 1 of 4 PageID 543
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
`WESTERN DIVISION
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`AMAZON DIGITAL SERVICES, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`No.: 2:12-cv-02767-JPM-tmp
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`UNOPPOSED MOTION AND MEMORANDUM FOR LEAVE
`TO FILE REPLY OF DEFENDANT AMAZON DIGITAL SERVICES,
`INC. SUPPORTING ITS MOTION TO TRANSFER
`(INCLUDING CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTATION)
`
`Pursuant to this Court’s Local Rule 7.2(c), defendant Amazon Digital Services, Inc.
`
`(“Amazon”) respectfully moves for entry of the accompanying proposed Order, granting leave to
`
`file a reply memorandum, not exceeding 10 pages in length, supporting Amazon’s pending mo-
`
`tion to transfer venue of this action under 28 U.S.C. 1404. In support of the relief sought herein,
`
`Amazon respectfully submits the following:
`
`1.
`
`This action was commenced on September 7, 2012. (Dkt. 1.) On September 20,
`
`2012, B.E. filed its First Amended Complaint. (Dkt. 9.) Amazon timely filed a motion to dis-
`
`miss all of B.E.’s claims on January 7, 2013. (Dkt. 32.) On February 12, 2013, Amazon filed a
`
`motion and supporting documents seeking transfer of this action to the Northern District of Cali-
`
`fornia under 28 U.S.C. § 1404. (Dkt. 43.) On that same day, all proceedings in this case were
`
`stayed pending a determination of Amazon’s motion to transfer. (Dkt. 45.) Plaintiff filed a re-
`
`sponse opposing Amazon’s motion to transfer on March 1, 2013. (Dkt. 46.)
`
`2.
`
`The determination of which venue best serves the interests of justice and the con-
`
`venience of parties and witnesses is among the most important matters the Court will decide in
`
`
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02767-JPM-tmp Document 47 Filed 03/11/13 Page 2 of 4 PageID 544
`
`
`this action. It will determine which court’s resources will be employed in managing and decid-
`
`ing the case, whether and how the parties may procure relevant evidence, and a potentially ex-
`
`tended series of travel and lodging arrangements for a large number of people. Indeed, given the
`
`existence of 18 other cases filed by the same plaintiff involving common U.S. patents (as de-
`
`tailed in the transfer motion), the filing of transfer motions in all of the cases, and the relation-
`
`ship of all the motions to the Court’s consideration of each, the Court’s decision will likely affect
`
`an extremely large number of people. The issue merits thorough consideration of all relevant
`
`facts, arguments, and authorities.
`
`3.
`
`As the party moving for transfer, Amazon bears the burden on the underlying mo-
`
`tion. Allowing Amazon an opportunity for rebuttal, through a reply memorandum, comports
`
`with fair application of that burden.
`
`4.
`
`B.E.’s opposition to Amazon’s transfer motion includes arguments whose self-
`
`contradictory character merits analysis. For example, plaintiff has suggested on the one hand
`
`that this action should be consolidated with 18 others, yet addresses the transfer motion as a con-
`
`test between only two parties’ circumstances. While Amazon believes the circumstances tilt
`
`strongly in favor of transfer, the Court should have the benefit of full argument on the implica-
`
`tions of these matters in the venue transfer context.
`
`5.
`
`This action is in an early stage. No Scheduling Order has been entered yet, and
`
`proceedings other than this transfer motion have been stayed pending its outcome. The proposed
`
`Order on this motion would require defendant to file its reply memorandum within just 7 days
`
`from the grant of leave. Allowing these few additional days before the motion is at issue for de-
`
`cision will not materially impede the progress of this action.
`
`6.
`
`Like any Section 1404 motion in a case of this type, briefing must address a num-
`
`ber of issues and circumstances. While Amazon is committed to its reply being as concise as
`
`possible, coverage of the issues meriting a reply appears likely to require more than the 5 pages
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02767-JPM-tmp Document 47 Filed 03/11/13 Page 3 of 4 PageID 545
`
`
`normally permitted by Local Rule 7.2(e). This motion respectfully requests authorization to use
`
`up to 10 pages for such purpose.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`s/ Glen G. Reid, Jr.
`Glen G. Reid, Jr. (#8184)
`WYATT, TARRANT & COMBS, LLP
`1715 Aaron Brenner Dr., Suite 800
`Memphis, TN 38120-4367
`Phone: 901.537.1000
`Facsimile: 901.537.1010
`greid@wyattfirm.com
`
`s/ Mark Vorder-Bruegge, Jr.
`Mark Vorder-Bruegge, Jr. (#06389)
`WYATT, TARRANT & COMBS, LLP
`1715 Aaron Brenner Dr., Suite 800
`Memphis, TN 38120-4367
`Phone: 901.537.1000
`Facsimile: 901.537.1010
`mvorder-bruegge@wyattfirm.com
`
`-and-
`
`J. David Hadden
`dhadden@fenwick.com
`Darren F. Donnelly
`ddonnelly@fenwick.com
`Saina S. Shamilov
`sshamilov@fenwick.com
`Ryan J. Marton
`rmarton@fenwick.com
`Clifford Web
`cweb@fenwick.com
`Justin Hulse
`jhulse@fenwick.com
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`801 California Street, 6th Floor
`Mountain View, CA 94041
`(650) 988-8500
`
`
`Counsel for Defendant
`AMAZON DIGITAL SERVICES, INC.
`
`- 3 -
`
`

`
`Case 2:12-cv-02767-JPM-tmp Document 47 Filed 03/11/13 Page 4 of 4 PageID 546
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTATION
`
`The undersigned attorney hereby certifies that prior to the filing of the foregoing motion,
`
`multiple consultations were held with Richard Carter, attorney for plaintiff B.E. Technology, to
`
`determine whether plaintiff would agree to the relief sought. During that time, the Court granted
`
`motions similar to the foregoing in a number of related cases. On February 21, 2013, Mr. Carter
`
`informed the undersigned by electronic mail that plaintiff could not consent, but will not oppose
`
`relief sought in this motion.
`
`
`
`
`
`s/Mark Vorder-Bruegge, Jr.
`Mark Vorder-Bruegge, Jr.
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`The foregoing document was filed under the Court’s CM/ECF system, automatically ef-
`
`fecting service on counsel of record for all other parties who have appeared in this action on the
`
`date of such service.
`
`
`
`
`
`60334743.1
`
`s/ Mark Vorder-Bruegge, Jr.
`Mark Vorder-Bruegge, Jr.
`
`- 4 -

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket