Legal Opinion
Covidien LP v. Esch
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided November 30, 2017No. Civil Action No. 16-12410-NMGPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
GORTON, United States District Judge
In January, 2017, defendant Brady Esch (“Esch”) filed a motion to dismiss or, alternatively, to transfer venue' claiming that .this Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Esch, that a necessary and indispensable party was not joined and that this case would be more properly litigated in California. In September, 2017, this Court denied that motion.
This Court rejected defendant’s argument that Vencióse, a start-up company that Esch founded, was a necessary party for this litigation. It also rejected defendant’s request to transfer venue to…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Atlantic Marine Constr. Co. v. United States Dist. Court for Western Dist. of Tex.Supreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Wilton v. Seven Falls Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Brillhart v. Excess Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Rio Grande Community Health Center, Inc. v. RullanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2005
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- DraftKings Inc. v. HermalynDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2024
- Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. v. Panoptis Patent Management, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2025
- Velez v. TurcoDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2021