Everlast World's Boxing Headquarters Corp. v. Ringside, Inc., 928 F. Supp. 2d 735

Everlast sued Ringside, RAL, and Combat for contract breach, trademark infringement, and unjust enrichment; Ringside later filed for bankruptcy in Kansas.
Everlast asserts two License Agreements: Boxing Products (US/Canada Trademarks) and Catalogue/Website (minimum purchase terms), both governed by New York law.
Allegations include that Ringside breached by withholding royalties and selling licensed Everlast products; Everlast terminated the agreements in June 2012.
Everlast contends Ringside formed Combat and RAL to shield creditors and continue Ringside’s business; Combat and RAL allegedly operate from Ringside’s premises with common ownership and personnel.
Allegations include that Ringside’s payments to Everlast were directed from New York and that Ringside conducted activities in New York related to the licenses.
Ringside’s bankruptcy stay in the District of Kansas is noted; the court ultimately transferred the case to Kansas and denied personal jurisdiction for RAL/Combat without prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the case should be transferred under § 1404(a).	NY connections and license negotiations favor NY.	Most operative facts in Kansas; witnesses and parties located there; transfer warranted.	Transfer granted to District of Kansas.
Whether the court has personal jurisdiction over RAL and Combat.	RAL/Combat are alter egos of Ringside and tied to NY activities.	No NY contacts by RAL/Combat; jurisdiction lacking.	Denied without prejudice.

In re Cuyahoga Equipment Corp., 980 F.2d 110 (2d Cir. 1992) (standard for § 1404(a) transfer analysis and weighing factors)
ESPN, Inc. v. Quiksilver, Inc., 581 F. Supp. 2d 542 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (importance of witnesses in trademark disputes for transfer)
Gulf Insurance Co. v. Glasbrenner, 417 F.3d 353 (2d Cir. 2005) (strict construction of venue and § 1404(a) considerations)