Case Information
*1 Case 4:06-cv-05866-SBA Document 16-2 Filed 11/20/2006 Page 1 of 2(cid:10) Case 4:06-cv-05866-SBA Document 48 Filed 02/12/07 Page 1 of 2 PATRICK J. CAROME (admitted pro hac vice )
SAMIR C. JAIN (No. 181572) WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006-3642 Telephone: (202) 663-6000
Facsimile: (202) 663-6363 patrick.carome@wilmerhale.com
samir.jain@wilmerhale.com
MARK D. FLANAGAN (No. 130303) NATHAN L. WALKER (No. 206128)
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP
1117 California Ave. Palo Alto, CA 94304
Telephone: (650) 858-6000 Facsimile: (650) 858-6100
mark.flanagan@wilmerhale.com nathan.walker@wilmerhale.com
Attorneys for Defendant AOL LLC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
DOE 1, DOE 2, and KASADORE ) CASE NO. C 06-5866 SBA RAMKISSOON, on Behalf of ) Themselves and all other Persons ) [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT AOL LLC’S MOTION TO DIMISS FOR IMPROPER VENUE Similarly Situated, ) )
Plaintiffs, ) )
v. ) Date: January 30, 2007 ) Time: 1 p.m.
AOL LLC, ) Courtroom: 3 ) Judge: Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong
Defendant. ) )
The Court having considered Defendant AOL LLC’s (“AOL’s”) Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue and the entire record herein, and the Court having found that said motion is well grounded, the Court hereby GRANTS Defendant AOL LLC’s motion to dismiss for improper venue pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs’ commencement of this action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California breached the forum PROPOSED ORDER C-06-5866 SBA 1 *2 Case 4:06-cv-05866-SBA Document 16-2 Filed 11/20/2006 Page 2 of 2(cid:10) Case 4:06-cv-05866-SBA Document 48 Filed 02/12/07 Page 2 of 2 selection in the parties’ written contract, which expressly requires that this controversy be 2-2- 7 adjudicated in a court in Virginia. Under federal law, forum selection clauses are presumptively valid and enforceable. See Carnival Cruise Lines v. Shute , 499 U.S. 585, 589-95 (1991); M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co. , 407 U.S. 1, 10 (1972); Manetti-Farrow, Inc. v. Gucci Am. , Inc. , 858 F.2d 509, 514 (9 th Cir. 1988). Nothing in the record suggests that Plaintiffs have shouldered their “heavy burden” of establishing grounds for rejecting enforcement of the provision. See Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. v. M.V. DSR Atlantic , 131 F.3d 1336, 1338 (9th Cir. 1997).
As such, this Court finds the forum selection clause valid and concludes it must be enforced. The Plaintiffs agreed the courts of Virginia have “exclusive jurisdiction” over any claims or disputes with AOL, and venue in the Northern District of California is improper.
Plaintiffs’ Complaint is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice to the refiling of their claims in a state or federal court in Virginia.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: _______________, 200__
________________________________________________ THE HONORABLE SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG United States District Judge
PROPOSED ORDER C-06-5866 SBA 2