Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00459/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00459-1/pdf.json

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

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KENNETH MONTGOMERY,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED AIR LINES, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-00459-VC 

ORDER RE VENUE DISCOVERY

Re: Dkt. No. 8

There is a threshold question whether this case is properly venued in the Northern District 

of California. The plaintiff alleges venue is proper under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3) because the 

records related to the positions at Dulles Airport for which he applied are maintained and 

administered in Dublin, CA. But there is a fact question about whether the relevant records are (or 

were, at the time the plaintiff filed suit) truly "maintained and administered" in Dublin within the 

meaning of the statute. The plaintiff proposes serving six interrogatories and one request for 

production of documents to help reach resolution of this question. Given the need to resolve the 

venue question at the outset, the Court orders that discovery may proceed, with the plaintiff being 

permitted to serve some variation (hopefully a less sloppy variation) of the proposed six 

interrogatories and one request for production. However, no further discovery will be permitted 

without leave of the Court. The plaintiff shall serve these discovery requests no later than 

February 27, 2015. The responses are due no later than March 20, 2015. (The defendant is 

already on notice of what is being requested and can begin preparations to respond as early as 

today.) 

Because there are 23 similar cases in this district (assigned to 11 different judges) and 

because the same venue question is presented in a chunk of these cases, the parties are encouraged 

to agree that the venue discovery conducted in this case may be used in the other cases. 

Case 3:15-cv-00459-VC Document 9 Filed 02/20/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

A further case management conference is scheduled for March 24, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. The 

defendant is not required to answer or otherwise respond to the fifth amended complaint until 

some time after the case management conference. If the defendant intends to continue to contest 

venue after discovery on the issue is complete, the Court is inclined to order that the defendant file 

a motion to transfer venue in early April.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 20, 2015

______________________________________

VINCE CHHABRIA

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-00459-VC Document 9 Filed 02/20/15 Page 2 of 2