*

Texas judge said 'substantial' ties to California

warranted

transfer

*

Appeals panel declined to block transfer

*

SpaceX seeking review from full appeals court

By Daniel Wiessner

March 8 (Reuters) - 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 ( AMZN ), Starbucks ( SBUX ) 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 ( AMZN ) joins companies arguing US labor board is

unconstitutional

(Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York)