Neuralstem, Inc. v. Reneuron, Ltd.
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Neuralstem, Inc. appeals the district court’s dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds of its claims against ReNeuron, Ltd. We reverse. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, it is unnecessary to recount it here
I
The district court properly found that England is an adequate alternative forum. See Tuazon v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 433 F.3d 1163, 1178 (9th Cir.2006) (an alternative forum is generally available where “the defendant is amenable to service of process and the forum provides ‘some remedy’ for the wrong at issue”) (citations omitted). ReNeuron tendered evidence showing that England offers a remedy for each of Neuralstem’s claims.
Neuralstem argues that it may seek amendment of its complaint to assert a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 256 for correction of inventorship and that its complaint requests as a remedy for ReNeuron’s alleged breach of contract that ReNeuron be compelled to assign any pending patent applications to Neuralstem.
These facts do not give rise to a conclusion that England is an inadequate alternative forum. First, Neuralstem has not shown that it will be unable to file a separate action in…