Opinion
November 20, 2006.
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT AOL LLC'S MOTION TO DIMISS FOR IMPROPER VENUE
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG, District Judge.
The Court having considered Defendant AOL LLC's ("AOL's") Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue and the entire record herein, and the Court having found that said motion is well grounded, the Court hereby GRANTS Defendant AOL LLC's motion to dismiss for improper venue pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs' commencement of this action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California breached the forum selection in the parties' written contract, which expressly requires that this controversy be adjudicated in a court in Virginia. Under federal law, forum selection clauses are presumptively valid and enforceable. See Carnival Cruise Lines v. Shute , 499 U.S. 585, 589-95 (1991); M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co. , 407 U.S. 1, 10 (1972); Manetti-Farrow, Inc. v. Gucci Am., Inc. , 858 F.2d 509, 514 (9th Cir. 1988). Nothing in the record suggests that Plaintiffs have shouldered their "heavy burden" of establishing grounds for rejecting enforcement of the provision. See Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. v. M.V. DSR Atlantic , 131 F.3d 1336, 1338 (9th Cir. 1997).
As such, this Court finds the forum selection clause valid and concludes it must be enforced. The Plaintiffs agreed the courts of Virginia have "exclusive jurisdiction" over any claims or disputes with AOL, and venue in the Northern District of California is improper.
Plaintiffs' Complaint is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice to the refiling of their claims in a state or federal court in Virginia.
IT IS SO ORDERED.