RITZMANN v. MAINETTI USA, INC., 2:22-cv-00566

Plaintiff sued under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Equal Pay Act, and New York state and city human rights laws.
Plaintiff is a New York resident who traveled to New York City for business but was employed by Defendant Mainetti, a corporation headquartered in New Jersey.
Plaintiff’s alleged discriminatory acts and the relevant communications with named defendants occurred at Mainetti’s New Jersey headquarters; plaintiff worked from the New Jersey office.
The complaint asserted venue was proper in the Southern District of New York, but the court found the factual allegations did not support that claim.
The Court issued an order to show cause directing Plaintiff to explain why the case should not be transferred to the District of New Jersey and granted a two‑week extension; Plaintiff did not respond.
The Court concluded a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in New Jersey and ordered transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1406.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Proper venue	Venue is proper in the Southern District of New York because the complained acts occurred in this district	Key events and communications occurred at Defendant’s New Jersey headquarters; District of New Jersey is proper	Court held that a substantial part of the events occurred in New Jersey and transferred the case to the District of New Jersey under § 1406
Adequacy of factual showing for venue	Alleged travel to NYC and residence in NY support venue in SDNY	Plaintiff’s allegations show work and key events took place in NJ office and HQ	Court found plaintiff’s factual allegations did not establish venue in SDNY
Response to court order to show cause	Plaintiff did not provide additional factual support within the deadline	Court warned that failure to respond would result in transfer	Because Plaintiff failed to respond, court ordered transfer in the interest of justice