Dodd v. IGATE Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 17

ORDER. Signed by Judge Vince Chhabria on 4/1/2015. (knm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/1/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

KARETHA DODD,

Case No. 15-cv-00431-VC

Plaintiff,
8
v.

ORDER

9
10

IGATE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

The court is tentatively of the view that the forum selection clause is ambiguous about

14

whether the parties contemplated that litigation could proceed in the Northern District of

15

California. This conclusion would result in a remand to Alameda County Superior Court, because

16

the ambiguity should be construed against the drafter of the clause, which in this case was iGATE.

17

However, it's not clear that the forum selection clause applies to this lawsuit in the first place. The

18

forum selection clause applies to "any proceeding by the Company or Employee to enforce their

19

rights hereunder" – that is, under the employment contract. The rights Dodd asserts in this lawsuit

20

do not appear to be rights conferred by contract; they appear to be rights conferred by statutory

21

and tort law that would exist independent of the employment contract. Cf. Cotter v. Lyft, Inc.,

22

2014 WL 3884416, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2014). At tomorrow's hearing, the parties should be

23

prepared to discuss this issue, including whether iGATE waived the issue by not raising it in

24

opposition to the remand motion.

25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 1, 2015
______________________________________
VINCE CHHABRIA
United States District Judge