Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Satori, LLC v. Prodema

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK


September 30, 2011

SATORI, LLC, PLAINTIFF,
v.
PRODEMA, LLS, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary L. Sharpe District Court Judge

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER

I. Introduction

Plaintiff Satori, LLC ("Satori") commenced this action against defendants Prodema, LLS ("Prodema") and Caversham, LLC ("Caversham"), seeking enforcement of a foreign money judgment granted by the Arbitrazh Court of the City of Moscow, pursuant to Article 53 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules. (See Compl. ¶ 3, Dkt. No. 1.) On September 22, 2011 the court issued a memorandum-decision and order granting Caversham's motion to dismiss and terminating it as a party. (See Dkt. No. 58.) In so doing, the court reserved judgment on Prodema's motion to dismiss and invited Satori and Prodema to submit supplemental briefings on the issue of venue. (See id. at 8.)

Both parties accepted the court's invitation and filed their briefs on September 29, 2011. (See Dkt. Nos. 59, 60). In addition to its brief, Satori also filed a motion to supplement its pleadings through jurisdictional discovery. (See Dkt. No. 60.) For the reasons that follow, Prodema's motion to dismiss is granted, and Satori's motion to supplement is denied.

II. Background

For a complete discussion of the facts underlying this dispute, the court refers the parties to its memorandum-decision and order of September 22, 2011. (See Dkt. No. 58 at 2-4.)

III. Standard of Review

The standard of review under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 is well established and will not be repeated here. For a full discussion of the standard, the court refers the parties to its decision in Ellis v. Cohen & Slamowitz, LLP, 701 F. Supp. 2d 215, 218 (N.D.N.Y. 2010).

IV. Discussion

In light of the dismissal of Caversham from this action, the court noted that venue in the Northern District of New York may no longer be proper. (See Dkt. No. 58 at 8.) Instead of dismissing on this ground sua sponte, the court opted to provide the parties with notice and an opportunity to be heard on the issue of venue. (Id.) Accordingly, Prodema now avers that the Northern District of New York is an improper venue.*fn1

(See Dkt. 59 at 4.) The court agrees.

Under the general venue statute for diversity actions, venue is only proper:

[I]n (1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same State, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction at the time the action is commenced, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought.

28 U.S.C. § 1391(a). Here, it is undisputed that the Northern District of New York is neither Prodema's residence, nor "a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated." Id. Furthermore, the fact that Prodema is a corporate citizen of Wyoming demonstrates that another district exits in which this action may be brought.*fn2 Accordingly, Prodema's motion to dismiss for improper venue is granted and all claims against it are dismissed.

V. Conclusion

WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that Prodema's motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 16) is GRANTED and all claims against Prodema are DISMISSED; and it is further

ORDERED that Satori's motion to supplement its pleadings through jurisdictional discovery (Dkt. No. 60) is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that the Clerk close this case; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk provide a copy of this Memorandum-Decision and Order to the parties.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.