Defendants’ motion to transfer venue is not the typical transfer motion seen by this Court.

Instead, it is motion based in large part on a morass of differing parties, myriad litigation

strategies, conflicting representations, and numerous courts. This Court will not rule on

Defendants’ motion at this time. Instead, this Court will stay this litigation pending a ruling from

the Northern District of California that has a case consisting of numerous declaratory judgment

actions involving many, if not all, of the same parties as this one.

In that case, TPL, the plaintiff in this case, filed a motion to transfer venue in the District

Court for the Northern District of California on January 4, 2006. That motion, which requests a

transfer to this Court, should be ripe for decision prior to the Motion to Transfer in this Court.

Many of the issues raised in the motions here are also raised in California. Further, the

California Court is far more familiar with the issues giving rise to the competing motions to

transfer. Thus,this Court hereby stays this case pending a decision by the California Court in the Northern District of California.``