Embry

B&G Foods North America, Inc. v. Embry

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 2, 20202:20-cv-00526California2,041 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 B&G FOODS NORTH AMERICA, INC., No. 2:20-cv-00526-KJM-DB Plaintiff, v. ORDER KIM EMBRY, NOAM GLICK, acting as enforcement representatives under California Proposition 65 on behalf of the State of California, 16 Defendants.

18 In this action for declaratory and injunctive relief addressing allegations of purported violation of California’s Proposition 65 by plaintiff B&G Foods North America, Inc. (“B&G”), B&G moves under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to transfer venue to the Northern District of California. Mot., ECF No. 10-1. Defendants Kim Embry and Noam Glick, acting as private enforcement representatives on behalf of the State of California (collectively “defendants”), oppose transfer. Opp’n, ECF No. 19. B&G filed a reply. Reply, ECF No. 21. Having considered the briefing and the applicable law, B&G’s motion to transfer venue is DENIED. I. LEGAL STANDARD “For the convenience of parties and witnesses, . . . a district court may…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.