Republic Mortg. Ins. Co., 35 F.Supp.2d at 486. The Court finds this factor slightly favors transferring venue to California. C. Conclusion Having conducted the evaluative test required under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), the Court finds that the factors favor transferring venue to California because ACC’s “evidence of inconvenience is insufficiently strong to ‘overcome the counterweight of the parties’ private expression of their venue preference.” Scotland Memorial, 2003 WL 151852, *6 (citation omit ted). “The presence of a valid forum-selection clause ... causes the burden to shift from the party seeking transfer (and enforcement of the clause) to the party opposing enforcement of the clause.” Id.; see also Weiss v. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc., 801 F.Supp. 1276, 1278 (S.D.N.Y.1992) (<HOLDING>). ACC “has failed to persuade the court that it
holding in addition that defendant must make at least some showing that under prevailing law he would be relieved of his contractual obligation to arbitrate if his factual allegations surrounding the arbitration agreement proved to be true holding that a permissive forum selection clause containing a waiver of any claims of forum non conveniens amounts to a mandatory forum selection clause at least where the plaintiff chose the designated forum recognizing that where plaintiff is from the forum state and defendant is from an alternate forum each forum can claim a connection to one of the parties holding that once a mandatory choice of forum clause is deemed valid the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate exceptional facts explaining why he should be relieved from his contractual duty holding that the burden is on the plaintiff