`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`HADONA DIEP,
`
`))
`
`Case No. 8:21-cv-02359-PJM
`
`))
`
`))
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`APPLE, INC.
`
`)
`)
`
`
` . )
`
`
`
`
` Defendant
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TRANSFER OF VENUE
`
`Plaintiff Hadona Diep (“Plaintiff””), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby
`
`moves this Court, pursuant to 28 United States Code § 1404(a) & (b), for the following
`
`reasons:
`
`1. 28 U.S.C. § 1404 states, in part:
`
`(a) For 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.
`(b) Upon motion, consent or stipulation of all parties, any action,
`suit or proceeding of a civil nature or any motion or hearing
`thereof, may be transferred, in the discretion of the court, from the
`division in which pending to any other division in the same district.
`Transfer of proceedings in rem brought by or on behalf of the
`United States may be transferred under this section without the
`consent of the United States where all other parties request
`transfer.
`
`28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) & (b).
`
`2. While this action was brought in the District in which Plaintiff resides, after
`
`additional investigation by Plaintiff’s counsel, it now appears that certain of
`
`Defendant’s user agreements that are likely applicable to this matter call for all
`
`disputes to be brought in courts located in Northern California.
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 8:21-cv-02359-PJM Document 13 Filed 11/04/21 Page 2 of 3
`
`3.
`
`In addition to the forum selection clause, Defendant’s headquarters are located in
`
`Northern California and it conducts substantial business there. Therefore,
`
`Northern California is a proper venue.
`
`4. Plaintiff has retained local counsel licensed in the Northern District of California,
`
`and is fully prepared to litigate the matter in that District.
`
`5. Defendant has been served with a Waiver of Service of Summons, but has not yet
`
`responded to it.
`
`6. Plaintiff brings this motion now to serve the interests of efficiency and judicial
`
`economy.
`
`7. Plaintiff believes that granting this Motion is in the interests of justice, judicial
`
`economy, and preservation of the resources of the parties, and will cause no
`
`prejudice to the Parties or any of the putative class members.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court order the
`
`matter be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of
`
`California for further proceedings, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) & (b).
`
`DATED: November 4, 2021
`
`RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Joshua G. Whitaker, Esq.
`District Court Bar No. 16457
`whitaker@adelphilaw.com
`
`Edward N. Griffin, Esq.
`District Court Bar No. 16435
`griffin@adelphilaw.com
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 8:21-cv-02359-PJM Document 13 Filed 11/04/21 Page 3 of 3
`
`ADELPHI LAW
`2306 Wineberry Terrace
`Baltimore, MD 21209
`Tel./Fax 888.367.0383
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I, Joshua Whitaker, counsel for Plaintiff, hereby certify that the foregoing
`
`opposition was served upon unserved Defendant by mailing a copy of it to Defendant's
`
`last known address, this 4th day of November, 2021, to wit:
`
`Apple, Inc.,
`One Apple Park Way
`Cupertino, CA 95014
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Joshua Whitaker
`
`
`
`3
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
