September 20, 2014
September 19, 2014
September 18, 2014
Talk to Chuck, but Not Here: Patent Case Against Charles Schwab & Co. Transferred to Northern District of California
Charles Schwab & Company’s ad campaign exhorts viewers to Talk to Chuck® for financial advice. A plaintiff that sued Charles Schwab & Company in Georgia for patent infringement, however, will have to talk to Charles Schwab about its case elsewhere.
Our August 23, 2012 post discussed three lawsuits filed on August 17 in the Northern District of Georgia by Joao Bock Transaction Systems, LLC (“JBTS”), one of which involves Charles Schwab.
On January 3, 2013, the Northern District of Georgia entered an order granting Charles Schwab’s motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of California. The court found that JBTS’ choice of forum was “entitled to little weight given [JBTS'] lack of connections to the Northern District of Georgia.” Further, the court did not find the presence of JBTS’ other 2 lawsuits in the District significant in its transfer determination. JBTS did not show that all of the defendants’ technology was identical, and JBTS apparently “filed at least four other cases in districts around the United States.” Finally, the court found that three other factors (convenience of witnesses, location of relevant documents and relative ease of access to sources of proof, and locus of operative facts) weighed “heavily” in favor of transferring the case to the Northern District of California.
The case transferred was Joao Bock Transaction Systems, LLC v. Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., No. 1:12-cv-02857-TWT, filed 08/17/12 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, and had been assigned to Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr.
<span class="advertise"> Advertisement </span>
- What’s Happening with Patents at the USPTO? Chief of Staff Byrnes has Answers!
- PCT International, Inc. v. Amphenol Corporation: Final Written Decision IPR2013-00229
- Apple Inc. v. Virnetx, Inc.: Denying Institution and Motion for Joinder IPR2014-00485
- PTO Litigation Center Report – September 19, 2014
- Standard Innovation Corporation v. Lelo, Inc.: Granting Motion to Deem Response Timely Filed IPR2014-00148
- Square, Inc. v. REM Holdings 3, LLC, Denying Motion for Leave to File Motion for Additional Discovery