Lenk v. Semiconductor Component Industries LLC

Background

Kenneth Lenk, proceeding without a lawyer, sued Semiconductor Component Industries, LLC, identified in the opinion as “ON.” He alleged age discrimination under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act and under California and Arizona law. He alleged that ON did not hire him for seven positions between May 2013 and September 2020 because of his age. He sought monetary damages, attorney’s fees, exemplary or punitive damages, and an injunction.

ON moved under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to transfer the case from the Northern District of California to the District of Arizona. Lenk opposed the motion.

Court’s analysis

The court first determined that the action could have been filed in Arizona. It stated that venue was proper there because Lenk and ON currently resided there; the opinion also states that Lenk was domiciled in Maricopa County, Arizona, and that ON’s headquarters were in Phoenix, Arizona.

The court gave Lenk’s choice of the Northern District of California little deference because he did not currently live there and because the record included evidence that he viewed California legal standards as more favorable to his claims. The private-interest factors slightly favored transfer. The court found that Arizona would be more convenient because both parties were in Arizona, that witness convenience was neutral because neither side identified witnesses by name or title, and that access to evidence favored Arizona because relevant business documents were likely to be at ON’s headquarters.

The public-interest factors also favored transfer overall. The court found that both districts were equally familiar with the federal law involved and that the applicable state-law familiarity factor was neutral. It found the factor concerning consideration of other claims irrelevant because Lenk’s claims were already consolidated. Arizona had a greater local interest because Lenk was an Arizona citizen and ON was headquartered there. The court also found that Arizona had a shorter median time from filing to trial and fewer pending cases per judge, even though the Northern District of California had a slightly shorter median time from filing to disposition during the period discussed.

Ruling and effect

Judge Edward J. Davila granted Defendant’s motion to transfer venue to the District of Arizona. The Clerk was ordered to transfer the file. The opinion addressed venue and convenience; it did not rule on the merits of Lenk’s age-discrimination allegations.