Ishankulov v. East Coast Storage Equipment Co.

Filing 18

TRANSFER ORDER granting 14 Motion to Change Venue: For the reasons stated in the attached written Order, the Clerk of Court is hereby ORDERED, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), to transfer this case to the United States Distri ct Court for the District of New Jersey. The provision of Local Rule 83.1 that requires a seven-day delay is hereby waived. Upon transferring the case, the Clerk is directed to close the case. Ordered by Judge Roslynn R. Mauskopf on 9/30/2014. (Mauskopf, Roslynn)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-----------------------------------------------------------X
MUIN ISHANKULOV,
Plaintiff,
- against -

TRANSFER ORDER
13-CV-6551 (RRM) (CLP)

EAST COAST STORAGE EQUIPMENT CO.,
Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff,
- against M&E CUSTOM DRYWALL,
Third-Party Defendant.
-----------------------------------------------------------X
ROSLYNN R. MAUSKOPF, United States District Judge.
On November 26, 2013, plaintiff Muin Ishankulov (“Ishankulov”) filed this diversitybased complaint against defendant East Coast Storage Equipment Co. (“East Coast”), a New
Jersey corporation, stemming from an allegedly tortious act that occurred in New Jersey. On
January 21, 2014, East Coast filed its answer, and the parties then appeared before Magistrate
Judge Pollak a number of times, both in person and telephonically. On July 18, 2014, pursuant
to a schedule set by Judge Pollak, East Coast filed a letter requesting a pre-motion conference to
consider its proposed motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. (Doc. No. 13.)
On July 24, 2014, Ishankulov filed a letter opposing East Coast’s request and seeking to
have venue transferred to the District of New Jersey. Ishankulov explained that, at the three
most recent conferences before Judge Pollak, the parties had expressly agreed that if, upon
conducting due diligence, Ishankulov determined that personal jurisdiction was lacking in this
district, the parties would stipulate to transferring the case to the District of New Jersey. (Doc.

No. 14.) East Coast did not file a response or otherwise challenge Ishankulov’s statements in
that July 24th letter.1
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), venue is proper in the judicial district where any defendant
resides or where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim transpired.
28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). East Coast is a New Jersey corporation, and the alleged tort occurred in a
New Jersey factory.2 Venue is therefore inappropriate in the Eastern District of New York.
Moreover, under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), “[f]or the convenience of parties and witnesses, in
the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division
where it might have been brought or to any district or division to which all parties have
consented.” 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Considering the circumstances of this case, including the
citizenship of the parties, the location of the alleged tort, and the parties’ express agreement to
transfer venue to the District of New Jersey, the interest of justice supports transferring venue
there.
Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is hereby ORDERED, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a),
to transfer this case to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey.

1

In its pre-motion conference letter, East Coast indicated that it was also seeking permission to institute a third-party
action against M&E Custom Drywall (“M&E”). On September 26, 2014, East Coast filed a third-party complaint
against M&E, (Doc. No. 15), which is located in New Jersey and appears to be a New Jersey corporation. (See Doc.
No. 16.) M&E has not yet appeared in this action.
2
As previously noted, third-party defendant M&E is evidently a New Jersey corporation as well.

2

The provision of Local Rule 83.1 that requires a seven-day delay is hereby waived. Upon
transferring the case, the Clerk is directed to close the case.
SO ORDERED.

Roslynn R. Mauskopf
Dated: Brooklyn, New York
September 30, 2014

____________________________________
ROSLYNN R. MAUSKOPF
United States District Judge

3