Graham v. Dyncorp International, Inc., 973 F. Supp. 2d 698 (2013)

Facts

  • Angela Graham, an Oklahoma resident, was working as a civilian at Camp Davis, a U.S. military base in Afghanistan.
  • On April 10, 2011, Graham was inside a portable laundry container when a vehicle driven by an employee of DynCorp International, LLC struck the container.
  • Graham alleged the collision caused serious injuries, including injuries to her back, neck, and jaw.
  • An accident worksheet attributed the incident to inattentive driving and indicated the accident was drug- or alcohol-related.
  • Graham filed a negligence suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, initially naming DynCorp International, Inc. as the defendant.
  • After DynCorp International, Inc. moved to dismiss for improper venue (or alternatively to transfer), Graham amended her complaint to add DynCorp International, LLC; DynCorp International, LLC filed a similar venue motion.
  • Graham relied on DynCorp’s business ties to the Southern District of Texas, including NASA-related contracts, to support venue there.
  • DynCorp submitted evidence that its business in the Southern District of Texas accounted for about 1.2% of its overall revenue and argued its contacts were not sufficient to make venue proper there.
  • DynCorp also showed substantial contacts with the Northern District of Texas (including a large Fort Worth office, an agent for service of process, use of external auditors, and services provided under a contract with an Air Force base).
  • If the court transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), DynCorp requested transfer to the Eastern District of Virginia, where its headquarters was located.

Issues

  1. Whether venue was proper in the Southern District of Texas for DynCorp International, Inc. and DynCorp International, LLC under 28 U.S.C. § 1391.
  2. If venue was improper, whether the court should dismiss or transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), and which district was an appropriate transferee forum.

Decision

  • The court held venue in the Southern District of Texas was improper for both DynCorp International, Inc. and DynCorp International, LLC.
  • The court dismissed DynCorp International, Inc. from the case.
  • The court transferred the claims against DynCorp International, LLC to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), rather than transferring to the Eastern District of Virginia.

Legal Principles

  • After a defendant challenges venue under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3), the plaintiff bears the burden of showing the chosen venue is proper.
  • Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), venue generally lies in (1) a district where any defendant resides (if all defendants reside in the same state), (2) a district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or (3) a fallback district if no district satisfies (1) or (2).
  • When the operative events occurred outside the United States, § 1391(b)(2) will not support venue in a plaintiff-selected U.S. district based on forum contacts unrelated to the injury.
  • For entity defendants in a state with more than one federal district, the venue “residence” inquiry focuses on whether the entity’s contacts with the particular district are sufficient (as if the district were a separate state) to treat it as residing there for venue purposes.
  • Limited business activity in a district—such as a small share of overall revenue from contracts performed there—may be insufficient to establish venue based on residence in that district.
  • When venue is improper, 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) authorizes the court to dismiss the action or, in the interest of justice, transfer it to any district where the action could have been brought.
  • A court may dismiss one defendant while transferring claims against another defendant if the venue analysis and available proper venues differ by entity, and the court may select a transferee district other than the one requested if the chosen district is a proper forum.

Conclusion

Because the accident occurred in Afghanistan and Graham did not show that either DynCorp International, Inc. or DynCorp International, LLC had district-specific contacts sufficient to make the Southern District of Texas a proper venue under § 1391, the court found venue improper, dismissed DynCorp International, Inc., and transferred the remaining claims against DynCorp International, LLC to the Northern District of Texas (Fort Worth Division) under § 1406(a).