IP News

In Odom v. Microsoft Corp., No. 08-331 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 30, 2009), Magistrate Judge John Love granted Microsoft's motion to transfer a patent infringement suit to the District of Oregon, holding that the Eastern District of Texas had no relevant connection to the case. The case was instituted by Oregon resident and solo inventor, Gary Odom.

The court analyzed both the public and private interest factors underlying every transfer analysis. With regard to the private interest factors, the Odom court found that the source of the evidence was a neutral factor because the allegedly infringing electronic software code was easily transferred. The court also ruled that the location of witnesses favored transfer since Microsoft had identified a number of witnesses located in Oregon and Washington who were relevant to its defenses. The court rejected plaintiff's argument that Microsoft was required to provide a list specifically identifying the name, location, and expected testimony of each of its anticipated witnesses. The court reasoned that such a requirement would only delay resolution of the transfer motion and, in any event, the plaintiff offered no list of witnesses located in Texas or randomly across the country. Further, citing the Federal Circuit's decision in In re TS Tech. USA Corp., No. 888, 2008 WL 5397522 at *5 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 29, 2008), the court indicated that since Microsoft's identified witnesses would need to travel an additional 1,700 miles to reach Tyler, TX, this factor must weigh considerably in favor of transfer.