Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00461/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00461-29/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEON MILLER,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED AIRLINES, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

AND COORDINATED CASES:

Palmer, Xavier v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00458 VC

Noble, Paul C. v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00461 VC

Jones Jr., Johnnie E. v. United Airlines, Inc. 

et al. 3:15-cv-00462 VC

Roane, Glen v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00464 VC

Ricketts, David v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00465 VC

Tom, Lester v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00466 VC

Crocker, Sal v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00468 VC

Manswell, Anthony v. United Airlines, Inc. 

et al. 3:15-cv-00469 VC

Minter, Karl v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00470 VC

Case No. 15-cv-00457-VC 

TENTATIVE RULING RE MOTIONS 

TO DISMISS OR TRANSFER AND 

MOTIONS TO TRANSFER

Case 3:15-cv-00461-VC Document 148 Filed 07/06/16 Page 1 of 3
2

Wilson, Darryl v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00472 VC

Sherman, Leo v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00473 VC

Haney, Ken v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00474 VC

John, Richard v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00475 VC

Briscoe, Odie v. United Airlines, Inc. et al. 

3:15-cv-00476 VC

In anticipation of tomorrow's hearing, the Court is tentatively inclined to deny the 

motions to transfer the following cases, both because the litigation would not be particularly 

more convenient in the districts where the defendants propose to transfer the cases, see

Hicks v. PGA Tour, Inc., No. 15-cv-00489-VC, 2015 WL 5300399, at *1 (N.D. Cal. July 24, 

2015), and because the degree to which these cases have already been delayed weigh against a 

transfer for convenience: Miller v. United Airlines, Inc. et al.; No. 15-cv-00457-VC, Crocker v. 

United Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-00468-VC; Palmer v. United Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-

cv-00458 VC; Jones v. United Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-00462-VC; Wilson v. United 

Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-00472-VC; and Sherman v. United Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv00473-VC.

The Court is tentatively inclined to grant the motions to transfer in the following cases, 

because they did not satisfy Title VII's venue statute, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3), when they were 

brought: Manswell v. United Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-00469-VC; Minter v. United 

Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-00470-VC; Roane v. United Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-00464-

VC; Tom v. United Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-00466-VC; Briscoe v. United Airlines, Inc. et 

al., No. 15-cv-00476-VC; Haney v. United Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-00474-VC; Noble v. 

United Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-00461-VC; and Ricketts v. United Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 

15-cv-00465-VC.

Case 3:15-cv-00461-VC Document 148 Filed 07/06/16 Page 2 of 3
3

With Noble and Ricketts, questions remain about the district to which the cases should be 

transferred.

Finally, the Court is undecided about whether to grant the motion to transfer John v. 

United Airlines, Inc. et al., No. 15-cv-00475-VC. The Court is not inclined to transfer the case 

on convenience grounds for the reasons stated above. It appears that John's lawsuit did not 

satisfy Title VII's venue provision when it was brought, but the defendants have not moved to 

transfer this case on the ground that venue is improper (as opposed to merely inconvenient).

Dated: July 6, 2016

______________________________________

VINCE CHHABRIA

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-00461-VC Document 148 Filed 07/06/16 Page 3 of 3