Free Order on Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Subject Jurisdiction - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:08-cv-00016-SLR Document 22 Filed 02/27/2008 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
RIVERBED `TECHNOLOGY INC., )
I
Plaintiff, )
I
v. ) Civ. No. 08-16-SLR
n I
QUANTUM CORPORATION, et al., )
I
Defendants. )
O R D E R
At Wilmington this 27th day of February, 2008, having reviewed the pending
motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to transfer, as well as the parties’ submissions
regarding jurisdictional discovery, oral argument, and Judge Alsup’s order;
IT IS ORDERED that the motion to dismiss is denied and the motion to transfer
is granted (D.I. 12), based on the procedural history of this litigation} Although I
generally honor a plaintiffs choice of venue, I conclude that the California case is the
first—filed in the context of the dispute between these parties. Moreover, consistent with
Judge Alsup’s order, it makes sense from "a practical judicia|—administration viewpoint"
‘More specifically, plaintiff in the case at bar, Riverbed, was sued in California by
defendant Quantum for infringing Quantum’s ‘810 patent; Riverbed counterclaimed for
infringement of its ‘249 patent and successfully moved for dismissal of Quantum’s
California complaint based on a defect in Quantum’s exclusive license. Before
Quantum could cure the defect, Riverbed filed the above declaratory judgment action in
this court, leaving Riverbed the counterclaim plaintiff in the California action and the
declaratoryjudgment plaintiff at bar. (D.I. 20)

Case 1:08-cv-00016-SLR Document 22 Filed O2/27/2008 Page 2 of 2
to have the entire dispute resolved through a single judge and jury. (D.l. 20) Therefore,
although briefing ls not complete, I conclude it would be a waste of the court’s and
parties’ resources to pursue discovery or a further briefing practice on the pending
motion and hereby order that the above captioned case be transferred to the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California. The order scheduling oral
argument (D.I. 17) is moot.
United States éstrlct Judge
2

Case 1:08-cv-00016-SLR

Document 22

Filed 02/27/2008

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:08-cv-00016-SLR

Document 22

Filed 02/27/2008

Page 2 of 2