Daniel Neelon v. Stan Bharti

MEMORANDUM

Daniel P. Neelon (“Neelon”) appeals the district court’s dismissal, on forum non conveniens grounds, of his claims against Stan Bharti (“Bharti”) and Forbes & Manhattan, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”). We reverse. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, it is unnecessary to recount it here.

Neelon argues that the district court abused its discretion by failing to accord Neelon’s forum choice proper deference, failing to consider the relevant private and public interest factors, and striking an unreasonable balance of the factors that were considered. We agree.

The district court offered the following consideration of the private and public interest factors:

The district court failed to consider several relevant factors.

First, and most important, the district court failed to consider the residence of the parties. Although Neelon, a Massachusetts resident, resides outside of the forum, he is a United States citizen. “ ‘[W]here the plaintiff is a United States citizen, the defendant must satisfy a heavy burden of proof,’ ” Boston Telecomms. Grp., Inc. v. Wood, 588 F.3d 1201, 1207 (9th Cir.2009) (quoting Lueck v.…