Equinix Beats Engineer’s Gender Discrimination, Retaliation Suit

Equinix Inc. defeated for now a former employee’s discrimination, harassment, and retaliation claims because the alleged events didn’t have enough ties to California, whose laws she invoked.

The US District Court for the District of Arizona ruled that the claims did not hold a substantial connection to California, where Equinix, a real estate investment trust, primarily operates.

Melissa Civello, a cybersecurity engineer who worked for Equinix remotely in Arizona, alleged she was discriminated against while she was employed there. Her complaint “broadly alleges specific instances of gender-based discrimination, workplace harassment, and retaliation,” according to the court order.

The case was first filed in a California state court, then removed by Equinix to the US District Court for the District of Northern California, and then transferred to the District of Arizona.

Civello had brought six claims under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act and one under the California Employment Protection Act.

For California employment law to apply extraterritorially, there must be a sufficient basis of facts to establish the work “holds a substantial connection to California,” the court said. Civello, however, lived in and worked remotely from Arizona at all relevant times, though she claims there are significant connections to California because Equinix is based there and developed its policies there. “These allegations do not establish a relevant connection to California for purposes of the extraterritoriality analysis,” according to the order.

“Civello does not plausibly argue the situs of her employment was in California,” Judge Krissa M. Lanham wrote Wednesday. “In fact, she does not allege she ever worked in California.”

Lanham also ruled that Civello fails to state a claim for wrongful termination under California common law. Her other common-law claims are not governed by California law but rather the law of Illinois, where she was initially hired, which her offer letter said would apply to any disputes. They too fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the court said.

The court gave Civello leave to amend her complaint by July 23 to try to address its deficiencies.

Civello was represented by Weiner Law. Equinix was represented by Rusing Lopez & Lizardi PLLC and McGuireWoods LLP.

The case is Civello v. Equinix Inc., D. Ariz., No. 2:25-cv-01028, 7/9/25.