DePuy Synthes Sales Inc. v. Howmedica Osteonics Corp., 28 F.4th 956 (9th Cir. 2022)

Summary: Motion to transfer venue was properly denied where forum-selection clause in employment agreement was void under California Labor Code section 925.

Facts: In September 2017, Jonathan L. Waber (“Waber”) was hired by Howmedica Osteonics Corp. (“HOC”) as a Joint Replacement Sales Associate. Waber signed an employment contract nominally with HOC’s parent company, Stryker Corporation (“Stryker”), which contained a restrictive one-year non-compete clause and forum-selection and choice-of-law clauses requiring adjudication of contract disputes in New Jersey. In July 2018, Waber left Stryker to work at DePuy Synthes Sales Inc. (“DePuy”), a competitor of HOC. Stryker threatened Waber with enforcement of the non-compete clause. Waber responded by sending Stryker a notice stating that he was exercising his right to void the forum-selection and choice-of-law clauses under California Labor Code section 925. DePuy and Waber then filed a preemptive declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, seeking a ruling that, among other things, the forum-selection and choice-of-law clauses were void, that California law governed the dispute, and that the non-compete clause was void under California Business and Professions Code section 16600. Stryker filed a motion to dismiss or to transfer venue to the United States District Court for the District...

Read Full Story: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/key-california-employment-law-cases-9876988/