Mims
Mims v. FedEx Corporation
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 SATCHIDANANDA MIMS, Case No. 25-cv-05722-JST
7 Plaintiff,
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE
v. 8 Re: ECF Nos. 14, 17 9 FEDEX CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. 10
11 12 Plaintiff Satchidananda Mims, a participant in the FedEx Corporation Retirement Savings 13 Plan (“Plan”), contends that Defendants FedEx Corporation and the Vanguard Group, Inc. violated 14 the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) when they improperly denied 15 his request for a hardship withdrawal. FedEx has moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim or 16 to dismiss or transfer for improper venue. ECF No. 14. Vanguard has moved to dismiss both for 17 failure to state a claim and for improper venue. ECF No. 17. The Court finds these motions 18 suitable for resolution without oral argument, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b); Civil L.R. 7-1(b), and will 19 transfer this case without reaching the parties’ remaining arguments. 20 The Plan contains the following venue provision:
21 The parties shall submit to the jurisdiction of the…