John Milito v. Infosys Limited

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington grants John Milito’s motion to remand an action alleging violations of Washington’s Equal Pay and Opportunities Act. The court concludes that Milito failed to allege a concrete injury sufficient to establish Article III standing, and therefore the federal court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. The court declines to dismiss under the futility exception and remands the case to King County Superior Court.

Holdings

1. Milito failed to allege a concrete and particularized injury in fact. His allegation that he lost time submitting a job application without disclosed compensation information did not establish the actual harm or material risk of harm required for Article III standing.
2. Because Milito lacked Article III standing, the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction and was required to remand the action to King County Superior Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).
3. The futility exception did not apply because Defendant failed to establish that dismissal by the state court after remand was an absolute certainty.
4. Branson did not alter the federal Article III standing analysis because it addressed who qualifies as a statutory job applicant, not whether a plaintiff suffered an injury in fact under Article III.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Milito alleged a concrete injury sufficient to establish Article III standing and confer federal subject matter jurisdiction.
2. Whether the alleged violation of Washington's Equal Pay and Opportunities Act caused actual harm or presented a material risk of harm to a concrete interest protected by the statute.
3. Whether the futility exception permitted the district court to dismiss rather than remand after determining that Milito lacked Article III standing.
4. Whether the Washington Supreme Court's decision in Branson v. Washington Fine Wine & Spirits, LLC altered the Article III standing analysis.

Disposition

remanded