Shutte, 431 F.2d at 25; see also Jumara v. State Farm Ins. Co., 55 F.3d 873, 879 (3d Cir. 1995) (noting that the plaintiff's "original" forum choice is a private interest factor). Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcom, Inc., No. 05-3350, 2008 WL 3821404, at *6 (D.N.J. Aug. 12, 2008) (holding that plaintiffs' forum choice becomes a neutral factor when plaintiff moves for transfer); Palazzo v. Ciurlino, No. 05-5093, 2006 WL 2177542, at *1 (D.N.J. July 28, 2006); Tischio v. Bontex, Inc., 16 F. Supp. 2d 511, 521 (D.N.J. 1998); see also Ward v. Natl. Entm't Collectibles Ass'n, Inc., No. 10-3403, 2011 WL 13128844, at *2 n. 5 (D.N.J. Aug. 2, 2011); Ricoh Co., Ltd, 817 F. Supp. at 480. Moreover, Courts in this district may require plaintiffs to show changed circumstances since initiating the action, but it is not a prerequisite to transfer.

The hotel where Plaintiff suffered her injuries and the place where the events that give rise to her claims occurred are in the Southern District of Florida. See Palazzo v. Ciurlino, Civ. No. 05-5093, 2006 WL 2177542, at *1 (D.N.J. July 28, 2006) (“[V]enue ... is appropriate . . . since that is the judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred.”).

The hotel where Plaintiff suffered her injuries and the events that give rise to her claims took place are in the Western District of Texas. See Palazzo v. Ciurlino, Civ. No. 05-5093, 2006 WL 2177542, at *1 (D.N.J. July 28, 2006) (“[V]enue ... is appropriate . . . since that is the judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred.”).

Their alternative forum preference does not merit the same deference. See Palazzo v. Ciurlino, No. 05-5093, 2006 WL 2177542, at *1 (D.N.J. July 28, 2006) ("Where it is the plaintiff seeking to transfer the case, the 'paramount consideration' given to the plaintiff's original choice of venue becomes a neutral factor." (citation omitted)).

But "[t]he decision to transfer must incorporate all relevant factors to determine whether on balance the litigation [would] more conveniently proceed and the interests of justice be better served by transfer to a different forum." Liggett, 102 F.Supp.2d at 526 (quotes and cites omitted); see Palazzo v. Ciurlino, No. 05-5093, 2006 WL 2177542, at *1 (D.N.J. July 28, 2006) ("[A]s in any Section 1404 transfer motion, the Court must consider the convenience of the parties, the convenience of the witnesses, and the interests of justice. Where it is the plaintiff seeking to transfer the case, the `paramount consideration' given to the plaintiff's original choice of venue, becomes a neutral factor.") (cites omitted).