APT SYSTEMS, INC. et al v. APPLE INC.

Filing 33

ORDER THAT THE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REMAND (DOC. NO. 26) IS DENIED. THE DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE (DOC. NO. 23) IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS FOLLOWS THE MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE IS GRANTED. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL TRANSFER THIS MATTER TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. THE MOTION TO DISMISS IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE DEFENDANT REFILING IT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE ATTORNEY (DOC. NO. 31) IS GRANTED. BRIAN J. BOYLE, ESQUIRE'S APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT IS WITHDRAWN; AND THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS MATTER AS CLOSED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE EDWARD G. SMITH ON 1/26/22. 1/26/22 ENTERED AND COPIES (NOT MAILED TO COUNSEL) AND E-MAILED.(er)

Case 5:21-cv-02121-EGS Document 33 Filed 01/26/22 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
APT SYSTEMS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
APPLE, INC.,
Defendant.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION NO. 21-2121

ORDER
AND NOW, this 26th day of January, 2022, after considering (1) the notice of removal
filed by the defendant, Apple, Inc. (Doc. No. 1), (2) the original complaint filed by the plaintiffs,
APT Systems, Inc. and Snapt Games, Inc. (Doc. No. 1-1), (3) the amended complaint (Doc. No.
21), (4) the plaintiff’s motion to remand (Doc. No. 26), (5) the defendant’s response in opposition
to the motion to remand (Doc. No. 27), (6) the defendant’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative,
motion to transfer venue (Doc. No. 23), (7) the plaintiff’s response in opposition to the motion to
dismiss or, in the alternative, motion to transfer venue, (8) the defendant’s reply in further support
of its motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, motion to transfer venue, (9) oral argument from
counsel on the motion to remand and the motion to transfer venue on September 8, 2021, and (10)
the defendant’s motion to substitute attorney (Doc. No. 31); and for the reasons set forth in the
separately filed memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1.

The plaintiff’s motion to remand (Doc. No. 26) is DENIED;

2.

The defendant’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, motion to transfer venue

(Doc. No. 23) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:

Case 5:21-cv-02121-EGS Document 33 Filed 01/26/22 Page 2 of 2

a.

The motion to transfer venue is GRANTED. The clerk of court shall

TRANSFER this matter to the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California; and
b.

The motion to dismiss is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to the

defendant refiling it in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California;
3.

The defendant’s motion to substitute attorney (Doc. No. 31) is GRANTED. Brian

J. Boyle, Esquire’s appearance on behalf of the defendant is WITHDRAWN; and
4.

The clerk of court shall mark this matter as CLOSED.
BY THE COURT:

/s/ Edward G. Smith
EDWARD G. SMITH, J.

2