Rocket maker SpaceX has asked a full U.S. appeals court to review a ruling rejecting the company's bid to keep its lawsuit challenging the structure of the National Labor Relations Board in Texas rather than California.
SpaceX in a petition filed late Thursday told the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that a judge in Brownsville, Texas applied the wrong standard when he ruled last month that the lawsuit has closer ties to California, where the NLRB is prosecuting claims that SpaceX illegally fired engineers for criticizing CEO Elon Musk.
A 5th Circuit panel in a 2-1 ruling on Tuesday denied SpaceX's bid to block the transfer but stayed its decision at the request of an unidentified judge so the company could seek review from the full, or en banc, court.
SpaceX in Thursday's filing said the case was properly filed in Brownsville because it operates a major launch facility known as Starbase nearby that would be affected if the NLRB rules that the company violated workers' rights to advocate for better working conditions.
SpaceX said U.S. District Judge Rolando Olvera erred in ruling that the case belonged in California because "the most substantial part of the events" giving rise to the lawsuit happened there and by not recognizing that it also has key ties to Texas.
"En banc review is vital to maintain uniformity and ensure that this Circuit’s trial courts do not follow the district court’s lead and oust litigants from lawful venues based on a misunderstanding of the legal standard," the company's lawyers wrote.
Shortly after the petition was filed, the 5th Circuit gave the NLRB until March 18 to respond.
Kayla Blado, a spokeswoman for the board, declined to comment on Friday.
The 5th Circuit panel did not explain its ruling earlier this week, but Circuit Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod wrote a lengthy dissent criticizing the transfer. Elrod said the NLRB "cannot seek to condemn SpaceX’s past labor practices in the Southern District of Texas, bind SpaceX’s future practices in the Southern District of Texas, and at the same time avoid proper venue in the Southern District of Texas.”
SpaceX in the lawsuit claims that the NLRB's in-house enforcement proceedings violate its constitutional right to a jury trial, and that limits on the removal of board members and administrative judges also violate the U.S. Constitution.
Amazon.com, Starbucks and Trader Joe's have made similar claims in cases pending before the labor board.
SpaceX filed the lawsuit in January one day after the NLRB general counsel issued a complaint alleging that it was illegal to fire the engineers, who had circulated a letter accusing Musk of sexist conduct.
An NLRB administrative judge held an initial hearing in the case on Tuesday but did not hear opening statements or testimony. The judge said she planned to hold further hearings beginning in May.
In re: Space Exploration Technologies, 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-40103.
For SpaceX: Harry Johnson, Michael Kenneally, Catherine Eschbach and Amanda Salz of Morgan Lewis & Bockius
For the NLRB: David Boehm
Read more:
SpaceX faces hearing on engineers fired after criticizing Elon Musk over sexism
SpaceX loses bid to keep challenge to NLRB structure in Texas court
Ex-SpaceX workers seek to intervene in company's lawsuit against NLRB
SpaceX sues US agency that accused it of firing workers critical of Elon Musk
SpaceX illegally fired workers critical of Elon Musk, US labor agency says
SpaceX, NLRB duel over proper venue for attack on agency's structure
Amazon joins companies arguing US labor board is unconstitutional
Get the latest legal news of the day delivered straight to your inbox with The Afternoon Docket.
