A bakery incorporated and headquartered in State A had a dispute with a mill incorporated and headquartered in State B over the quality of the flour the mill had delivered to the bakery. The bakery sued the mill in a federal court in State A for breach of contract, seeking $100,000 in damages.
The contract between the bakery and the mill contained a clause designated State B courts as the sole venue for litigating disputes arising under the contract. Under precedent of the highest court in State A, forum selection clauses are unenforceable as against public policy; under U. S. Supreme Court precedent, such clauses are enforceable.
The mill has moved to transfer the case to a federal court in State B, citing the forum-selection clause in the parties contract and asserting the facts that the flour was produced in State B and that the majority of likely witnesses are in State B.
Required:
a. Is the court likely to grant the mill's motion?