What is the legal test for a motion to stay or dismiss an action on the ground of inconvenient forum?

"A defendant, on or before the last day of his or her time to plead . . . , may serve and file a notice of motion . . . [] . . . [] [t]o stay or dismiss the action on the ground of inconvenient forum." (Code Civ. Proc., 418.10, subd. (a)(2).) "In determining whether to grant a motion based on forum non conveniens, a court must first determine whether the alternate forum is a 'suitable' place for trial. If it is, the next step is to consider the private interests of the litigants and the interests of the public in retaining the action for trial in California." (Stangvik v. Shiley Inc. (1991) 54 Cal.3d 744, 751.)

At the first step, "'[a] forum is suitable if there is jurisdiction and no statute of limitations bar to hearing the case on the merits. [Citation.] "[A] forum is suitable where an action 'can be brought,' although not necessarily won." [Citation.]' [Citations.]" (Roulier v. Cannondale (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 1180, 1186.) At the next step, the relevant private interests are those "'that make trial and the enforceability of the ensuing judgment expeditious and relatively inexpensive, such as the ease of access to sources of proof, the cost of obtaining attendance of witnesses, and the availability of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling witnesses.'" (Id. at p. 1189.) The relevant public interest factors include "avoidance of overburdening local courts with congested calendars, protecting

Page 7