Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_24-cv-03611/USCOURTS-azd-2_24-cv-03611-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 880
Nature of Suit: other
Cause of Action: 18:1836(b) Civil Action to Protect Trade Secrets

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Pima Heart Physicians PC,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Sonoran Vein and Endovascular LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-24-03611-PHX-DJH

ORDER 

Plaintiff Pima Heart Physicians, PC, (“Plaintiff”) is a “cardiovascular practice” in 

Arizona which has filed a Complaint against Sonoran Vein and Endovascular, LLC, Dr. 

Luis R. Leon and Ms. Heather Bailey (“Defendants”) for Misappropriation of Trade 

Secrets, Breach of Contract, Breach of Loyalty and Tortious Interference with a 

Contractual Relationship. (Doc. 1). Plaintiff alleges that its Principal Place of Business

(“PPOB”) is in Tucson (Id. at ¶ 6), Defendant Sonoran Vein’s PPOB is in Peoria (Id. at ¶ 7)

and that Defendants Leon and Bailey reside in Pima County. (Id. at ¶¶ 8–9). Upon review 

of the Complaint and the allegations set forth therein, the Court finds that venue is proper 

in the Tucson Division, not Phoenix.

A civil action may be brought in: “(1) a judicial district in which any defendant 

resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located; [or] (2) a 

judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the 

claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is located.” 

28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) (emphasis added). If the current venue is improper, the Court “shall

dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in 

Case 2:24-cv-03611-DJH Document 9 Filed 12/20/24 Page 1 of 3
- 2 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

which it could have been brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) (emphasis added).

The Local Rules for the District of Arizona provide: “Unless otherwise ordered by 

the Court, all civil and criminal cases founded on causes of action (1) arising in the Phoenix 

division shall be tried in Phoenix, (2) arising in the Prescott division shall be tried in 

Prescott, and (3) arising in the Tucson division shall be tried in Tucson.” LRCiv 77.1(c). 

The Phoenix Division is comprised of Maricopa, Pinal, Yuma, La Paz, and Gila counties. 

Id. at 77.1(a). The Tucson Division is comprised of Pima, Cochise, Santa Cruz, Graham, 

and Greenlee counties. Id.

Plaintiff alleges that venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. Section 1391(b)(2) because 

Sonoran Vein’s principal place of business is in Maricopa County and a substantial portion 

of the events or omissions giving rise to the action occurred in Arizona. (Doc. 1 at ¶¶ 6, 12) 

(emphasis added). The events as alleged in the Complaint appear to have occurred 

exclusively in Tucson. For example, Plaintiff alleges that it discovered that Dr. Leon was 

featured on the Sonoran Vein website as a vascular surgeon, working out of its office at 

1815 W St Mary’s Rd, Tucson, AZ 85745 and its office at 2055 W Hospital Drive, Tucson, 

AZ 85704. (Id. at ¶ 53) (emphasis added). It also argues that “based on forensic artifacts 

on the Pima Heart desktop that Ms. Clark used when she was employed with Pima Heart

[in Tucson], Ms. Clark accessed multiple folders and documents while using an external 

USB drive between June 12, 2024, and July 11, 2024, indicative of copying material from 

the desktop to the external USB drive.” (Id. at ¶ 62). The only fact that makes venue in 

Phoenix proper is that Defendant Sonoran Vein’s PPOB is here. However, Sonoran Vein 

has several locations throughout Arizona and Dr. Leon is alleged to have left Pima Heart 

to work at the Tucson Sonoran Vein locations, not the Phoenix ones. (See id. at ¶ 53). 

Because the material events in this matter are alleged to have occurred in the Tucson 

Division, this case should be tried in the Tucson Division—not the Phoenix Division. 

LRCiv 77.1(c). 

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:24-cv-03611-DJH Document 9 Filed 12/20/24 Page 2 of 3
- 3 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that this matter is TRANSFERRED to the Tucson Division

under Local Rule 77.1. 

Dated this 20th day of December, 2024.

Honorable Diane J. Humetewa

United States District Judge

Case 2:24-cv-03611-DJH Document 9 Filed 12/20/24 Page 3 of 3