Johnson v. Bryant

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
*
THOMAS C. JOHNSON, 	*
*
Plaintiff, 	*
v. 	* 	Civil Case No. SAG-25-02923
*
JEFFREY BRYANT, 	*
*
Defendant. 	*
* 	* 	* 	* 	* 	* 	* 	* 	* 	* 	* 	* 	*
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff 	Thomas 	C. 	Johnson-La’Beija 	filed 	this 	trademark-related 	action 	against
Defendant Jeffrey Bryant. ECF 1. Both parties are self-represented. Defendant, a resident of New
York, has filed a motion to dismiss, citing a variety of grounds including lack of personal
jurisdiction and improper venue. ECF 18 at 2. Plaintiff has opposed the motion, ECF 21, but offers
no explanation in his opposition justifying this Court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over
Defendant in Maryland or contending why venue would be proper here. In fact, Plaintiff’s only
response as to Defendant’s venue argument is to note that, where venue is lacking, “Transfer—not
dismissal—is required.” ECF 21 at 4.
Where a defendant contests venue pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3), the plaintiff bears the burden
to make a prima facie showing that venue is proper in the district in which the case was filed. See
Mitrano v. Hawes, 377 F.3d 402, 405 (4th Cir. 2004); Jones v. Koons Auto., Inc., 752 F. Supp. 2d
670, 679-80 (D. Md. 2010). In assessing the plaintiff’s showing, the court may consider evidence
outside the pleadings and must view the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. See
Aggarao v. MOL Ship Mgmt. Co., Ltd., 675 F.3d 355, 365-66 (4th Cir. 2012). More specifically,
the Court must accept the facts alleged in the Complaint as true unless the defendant submits
Case 1:25-cv-02923-SAG Document 24 Filed 01/20/26 Page 1 of 2

2
evidence by affidavit to the contrary, and where there is discrepant information submitted in
parties’ affidavits, must give greater weight to the evidence submitted by the plaintiff. See Delong
Equip. Co. v. Washington Mills Abrasive Co., 840 F.2d 843, 845 (11th Cir. 1988), overruled on
other grounds by Innovative Clinical & Consulting Servs., LLC v. First Nat'l Bank of Ames, Ga.,
620 S.E. 2d 352 (Ga. 2005). If venue is lacking, 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) provides, “The district court
of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or
if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have
been brought.”
Plaintiff has offered nothing, either in his Complaint or in his opposition, that would permit
this Court to find that he has made the required prima facie showing of proper venue. Accordingly,
this Court will transfer this case to the Southern District of New York pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1406(a), which will resolve any issue with personal jurisdiction or venue. This Court will decline
to address the remainder of Defendant’s arguments for dismissal, as they should be resolved in the
transferee court.
For the reasons set forth above, this Court will transfer this case to the Southern District of
New York for further adjudication. A separate Order follows.
Dated: January __, 2026 	/s/
Stephanie A. Gallagher
United States District Judge
20
Case 1:25-cv-02923-SAG Document 24 Filed 01/20/26 Page 2 of 2