Airis International Holdings LLC et al v. West et al

Filing 38

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 29 Renewed MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Signed by Judge Gray H. Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4)

convenient for Airis to litigate in Georgia as well. Id. The Phillips Defendants also assert that
Georgia has a strong interest in policing the practice of accounting within the state, while Texas has
little interest in overseeing Georgia accountants. Id. Finally, they assert that the interests of the
interstate judicial system are best served by litigating the issues in Georgia because all parties have
offices and relevant witnesses in Georgia. Id.
Plaintiffs argue that defendants have not made a compelling showing that litigating the matter
in Texas presents an unreasonable burden on them. Dkt. 33 at 10. Plaintiffs also argue that any
burden on the Phillips Defendants of having to travel to Texas to litigate would be equally felt by
forcing plaintiffs to litigate in Georgia. Id. at 11. Plaintiffs also point out that any inconvenience
defendants claim cannot be described as so gravely difficult and inconvenient that defendants would
be at an unfair and severe disadvantage. Id. And, plaintiffs assert, Texas has strong interests in
adjudicating a suit involving a corporation with a principal place of business in Houston, and the
Phillips Defendants have shown no evidence that Georgia’s interest is any greater than that of Texas.
Given that minimum contacts exist and defendants cannot put forth more concrete or
compelling reasons as to why it is unfair to have to defend their actions in Texas, the court believes
that it does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice to maintain the lawsuit
in Texas.
III. CONCLUSION
Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction (Dkt. 29) is DENIED.
It is so ORDERED.
Signed at Houston, Texas on July 27, 2015.

___________________________________
Gray H. Miller
United States District Judge
8