VINAY K. AWASTHI VS. INTEL CORPORATION

Matter on the Law & Motion / Discovery calendar for Thursday, September 4, 2025, Line 10. DEFENDANT INTEL CORPORATION's DEMURRER to COMPLAINT.

Plaintiff Vinay K. Awasthi brings this action challenging his discharge from Intel Corporation. The complaint also alleges that he was drugged and surveilled. Intel demurs. The court sustains the demurrer without leave to amend.

The court grants the request for judicial notice of documents from the federal lawsuit, Case No. 24-cv-05621-WHO (N.D. Cal.). In his federal complaint, Awasthi challenged his termination and alleged that he was surveilled and drugged. While the federal case was pending, Awasthi filed the present action. Intel removed it to federal court and the federal district court related the actions. (RJN, Ex. L.) The federal court dismissed his federal lawsuit with prejudice and remanded this case. (Id., Ex. L., p. 7.)

Intel bases its demurrer on a variety of reasons. The court sustains the demurrer without leave to amend because the action is barred by claim preclusion. Awasthi's federal complaint raised the same issues and the same invasion of primary rights (his interest in his employment at Intel and the bodily integrity and privacy issues raised in both proceedings). Intel obtained a final judgment on the merits. Awasthi may not now relitigate the same claims. (See Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co. (2002) 28 Cal.4th 888, 896-97; Boeken v. Philip Morris USA, Inc. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 788, 793.) Because this ground is sufficient, the court does not reach Intel's remaining arguments.

The court must grant leave to amend unless it appears that amendment would be futile. Given the diverse nature of the claims raised in the federal case, it appears that amendment would be futile here.

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.

Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept301tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.

Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept301tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.

The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion or Discovery Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(301/CVA) | |