Hunter v. ASRC Federal Data Solutions, LLC

Background

James Hunter sued ASRC Federal Data Solutions, LLC, asserting claims under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, California Labor Code section 1102.5, and California’s common-law claim for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. He alleged that ASRC hired him in November 2018 as a senior software engineer in an exempt position located at Moffett Federal Air Field in Mountain View, California.

According to the complaint, a coworker implied that Hunter owed him a personal obligation because of Hunter’s hiring. The coworker then allegedly hovered near Hunter, invaded his personal space, sat near him during team meetings, and gazed at his groin and crotch area. Hunter reported the conduct to the coworker’s supervisor and to human-resources employees. He alleged that ASRC took no action and terminated his employment a few months after his reports.

The court stated that it had diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. It noted that Hunter resided exclusively in California, ASRC was a Delaware limited liability company, and the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.

Motion to Dismiss

ASRC moved to dismiss all claims. It argued that Moffett Field is a federal enclave and that Hunter’s state-law claims therefore failed because the rights involved were enacted or recognized after the enclave was established.

A federal enclave is land over which the federal government exercises legislative authority, subject to any jurisdiction the state reserved when it transferred the land. The court took judicial notice—that is, accepted without requiring formal proof—that Moffett Field became a federal enclave in 1931. The court relied on the field’s public history, prior decisions recognizing its status, and Hunter’s failure to dispute that status.

The court rejected Hunter’s argument that judicially noticing Moffett Field’s status converted the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment. It also rejected his argument that the complaint did not allege that the challenged conduct occurred at Moffett Field. The court reasoned that the complaint identified Hunter’s work location as Moffett Federal Airfield and described subsequent workplace-based events, making Moffett Field the only plausible location alleged in the complaint.

Ruling

The court held that the federal enclave doctrine precluded the state-law claims as currently pleaded. It concluded that the Fair Employment and Housing Act was enacted after 1931, that California’s common-law wrongful-termination claim was first recognized in 1959, and that Labor Code section 1102.5 was enacted in 1984.

The court GRANTED ASRC’s motion to dismiss. It also granted Hunter leave to amend by September 7, 2023, because he might be able to allege that the conduct occurred outside the federal enclave or assert claims not precluded by the federal enclave doctrine. The order did not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.