## Facts

- Richard A. Nossen, a Virginia resident and former IRS Criminal Investigation official, authored two investigative training works used in financial-crime instruction.
- Michael A. Hoy, doing business as Loompanics Unlimited and residing in Washington, marketed and sold “controversial and unusual” publications by mail-order, including sales into Virginia.
- Hoy published and advertised a book titled “Advanced Investigative Techniques for Private Financial Records, by Richard A. Nossen,” described as a combined reprinting of Nossen’s two works.
- The publication attributed authorship to Nossen and included a brief biography, and Hoy promoted the book through catalog advertisements.
- Nossen alleged Hoy acted without Nossen’s knowledge, consent, or permission and marketed the work in a manner suggesting Nossen’s approval.
- Nossen alleged reputational and emotional harms, asserting Hoy targeted customers interested in criminal activity and distorted the characterization of Nossen’s work to appeal to that audience.
- Nossen sued under Virginia law for unlawful appropriation of name and reputation, conversion, and quasi-contract/unjust enrichment based on Hoy’s profits.
- Hoy moved to transfer venue to the Western District of Washington and to dismiss for failure to state a claim, arguing that the United States held rights to the works.

## Issues

1. Whether the action should be transferred to the Western District of Washington under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).
2. Whether the complaint stated plausible Virginia claims for misappropriation of name/reputation, conversion, and unjust enrichment when the defendant asserted that the United States held rights to the underlying works.

## Decision

- The court denied the motion to transfer.
- The court denied the motion to dismiss.
- The court held that, at the pleading stage, Nossen alleged sufficient connections to Virginia and sufficient legally cognizable interests to proceed on misappropriation, conversion, and unjust enrichment theories.

## Legal Principles

- Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), the movant bears the burden to show transfer is warranted based on convenience and the interests of justice; a plaintiff’s chosen forum is given weight when the controversy has meaningful ties to that forum.
- On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the court accepts well-pleaded factual allegations as true and tests only whether the complaint plausibly states claims recognized by applicable state law.
- Unauthorized commercial use of a person’s name and professional identity, allegedly implying endorsement and used to sell a product for profit, can support a Virginia misappropriation-type claim at the pleading stage.
- For state-law conversion and restitutionary theories, the absence of asserted legal title to publication rights does not necessarily defeat claims where the plaintiff alleges a sufficient personal or equitable interest in the value derived from his labor, authorship, and reputation.
- An unjust enrichment (quasi-contract) claim may proceed when the defendant is alleged to have knowingly retained benefits from exploiting another’s efforts and persona without consent, even where formal intellectual-property ownership is disputed.

## Conclusion

The court kept the case in Virginia and allowed the suit to proceed, concluding that Nossen plausibly alleged that Hoy profited from unauthorized use of Nossen’s name, reputation, and work, and that the asserted lack of formal title in Nossen did not bar misappropriation, conversion, or unjust enrichment claims at the motion-to-dismiss stage.


Nossen v. Hoy, 750 F. Supp. 740 (E.D. Va. 1990)