action. It is not an effort to jump the gun on the Colorado Action. Cf. Factors Etc., Inc. v. Pro Arts, Inc., 579 F.2d 215, 219 (2d Cir.1978) (affirming that a declaratory judgment action should not be a prize to the winner of a race to the courthouse), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 908, 99 S.Ct. 1215, 59 L.Ed.2d 455 (1979); Great American Ins. Co. v. Houston General Ins. Co., 735 F.Supp. 581, 586 (S.D.N.Y.1990) (Leisure, J.) (finding that “the misuse of the Declaratory Judgment Act to gain a procedural advantage and preempt the forum choice of the plaintiff in the coercive action militates in favor of dismissing the declaratory judgment action”); Cooperative Centrale Raiffeisen-Boerenleen Bank B.A v. Northwestern Nat’l Ins. Co., 778 F.Supp. 1274, 1278-79 (S.D.N.Y.1991) (Patterson, J.) (<HOLDING>). II. The defendant also seeks to transfer this
holding that a district court may dismiss a declaratory judgment action that was filed in anticipation of  impending litigation and motivated solely by considerations of forum shopping holding that declaratory relief is not appropriate for determination of rights in anticipation of enforcement action that may never occur holding that in a declaratory judgment action it is the character of the impending action not the plaintiffs defense that determines whether there is federal question jurisdiction holding that where the question to be resolved in the declaratory judgment action will be decided in a pending action it is inappropriate to grant a declaratory judgment holding that the first filed rule should not be mechanically applied when a declaratory judgment action is filed in anticipation of a coercive action