Opinion
2:22-cv-766-SPC-NPM
12-06-2022
Disclaimer: Papers hyperlinked to CM/ECF may be subject to PACER fees. By using hyperlinks, the Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or their services or products, nor does it have any agreements with them. The Court is not responsible for a hyperlink's functionality, and a failed hyperlink does not affect this Order.
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Before the Court is a sua spote review of the Complaint (Doc. 1). A plaintiff “must begin an action in the division to which the action is most directly connected or in which the action is most conveniently advanced.” Local Rule 1.04(b). Plaintiff filed in this Division. But there is no connection to Fort Myers or convenience litigating here. Rather, the proper forum is the Orlando division. The Orlando division encompasses Orange County, Florida, which contains Lake Buena Vista and Orlando, Florida-the area where Defendant resides or has allegedly committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Because
Orlando is most connected to, and convenient for, this action, the Court transfers there. Local Rule 1.04(b) (“The judge must transfer the action to the division most consistent with the purpose of this rule”); 28 U.S.C. §1406 (“The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought”).
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
The Clerk is DIRECTED to TRANSFER this action to the Orlando Division of the Middle District of Florida and CLOSE the Fort Myers case.
DONE and ORDERED.