ORDER GRANTING

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO THE OMPLAINT

WILLIAM G. COBB, Magistrate Judge.

On August 1,2017, Boston Heart Diagnostics Corporation ("BHDX") sued MD Labs. Inc. in the District of Connecticut for patent infringement. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), venue for patent cases is appropriate "in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business." In May of 2017, the Supreme Court held that under § 1400(b), "a domestic corporation `resides' only in its State of incorporation for purposes of the patent venue statute." TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, 137 S.Ct. 1514, 1517 (2017). Defendant MD Labs is incorporated in Nevada and does not have any regular and established place of business in Connecticut. Therefore, MD Labs informed BHDX that it would move to dismiss the complaint for improper venue if BHDX did not move to transfer the case to the District of Nevada. BHDX agreed and filed a motion to transfer, which the Connecticut court granted.

In light of the transfer and opening of this case in Nevada, MD Labs has requested an extension until February 20, 2018 to file its response to the complaint. BHDX has agreed to this extension. No schedule has been set in this matter, and therefore this extension will not interfere with any scheduled dates.

Wherefore, MD Labs respectfully requests that this Court grant the requested extension and order that MD Labs' response to the complaint is due on February 20, 2018.

IT IS SO ORDERED.