Professional Documents
Culture Documents
META PLATFORMS TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
META PLATFORMS TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
18 I. INTRODUCTION
19 Pursuant to RCW 49.17.130(3), Petitioner Meta Platforms Technologies, LLC (“Meta”)
20 petitions for judicial review of an Order and Notice of Immediate Restraint (the “Order”) issued
21 by the Division of Occupational Safety and Health, Washington State Department of Labor and
22 Industries (“DOSH”) to Meta on December 18, 2023. A copy of the Order is attached hereto as
23 Exhibit A. Meta asks this Court to quash, enjoin, or modify the Order because DOSH cannot
24 meet its burden of proving that the extraordinary circumstances required for the issuance of
25 such an order are present; DOSH failed to comply with the procedural requirements for issuing
26 such an order; the Order as drafted is vague, ambiguous, and overbroad; and the Order violates
27 due process by depriving Meta of its property rights before DOSH has proven a violation of
3 II. PARTIES
4 1. Petitioner Meta is a Delaware company with its principal place of business in
5 Menlo Park, California. Meta operates a facility in Redmond, Washington that is the subject of
6 DOSH’s Order.
8 State of Washington that issued the Order to Meta pursuant to RCW 49.17.130(1).
9 3. Defendant Joel Sacks, acting under color of state law, is the Director of the
10 Department of Labor and Industries of the State of Washington and is responsible for
12 III. JURISDICTION
13 4. This petition is filed pursuant to RCW 49.17.130(3), which confers upon Meta
14 the right to petition the superior courts of the State of Washington to contest an order
16 This Court has jurisdiction to grant appropriate relief pursuant to RCW 49.17.130(3).
18 because the worksite that is the subject of DOSH’s Order is located in King County,
19 Washington.
22 facility, at 9461 Willows Road, Redmond, Washington 98502. Much of the Matrix facility’s
24 designed space engineered to filter pollutants such as dust, airborne microbes, and aerosol
26 engineering controls in the cleanroom that are consistent with industry best practices and are in
27 full compliance with state and federal health and safety regulations.
2 violations of the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act, RCW 49.17 (“WISHA”). On
3 November 10, 2022, DOSH issued Citation No. 317969023 (the “Citation”) to Meta for nine
4 alleged violations of WISHA in the Matrix facility’s cleanroom and nearby gas delivery room.
5 8. Meta contends that the Citation is without merit and has appealed the Citation to
6 the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals (the “Board”). Meta’s appeal remains pending
7 before the Board, which has scheduled a hearing on the merits for June 2024. DOSH has yet to
9 9. In April 2023, Meta moved for a stay of the abatement deadlines in the Citation
10 pursuant to RCW 49.17.140(5). On May 23, 2023, the Board summarily denied a stay of
11 abatement in a conclusory order that simply stated that the standard for a stay was not met,
12 without explaining why the extensive evidence and arguments Meta submitted in support of a
14 10. After a stay of abatement was denied, Meta worked with DOSH to conduct
15 additional air sampling that DOSH contended was required in the cleanroom. On July 12,
16 2023, despite disagreeing with the Citation, Meta submitted a Certification of Abatement to
17 DOSH detailing the multiple substantial interim actions Meta has taken to address DOSH’s
18 concerns and ensure the continued safety of its employees while Meta’s appeal of the Citation
19 remains pending.
20 11. After receiving Meta’s Certification of Abatement, DOSH did not reach out to
21 Meta to discuss any alleged deficiencies in the certification or additional abatement measures
22 DOSH believed were necessary. Instead, on July 19, 2023, DOSH showed up at the Matrix
23 facility to open a follow-up inspection to determine whether Meta’s interim actions “failed to
24 abate” the hazards alleged in the Citation. Meta fully cooperated with this follow-up
25 inspection. During the inspection, DOSH provided Meta with little guidance regarding what
26 additional actions, if any, DOSH believed were required to abate the alleged hazards.
27
2 the follow-up inspection. At the conference, which occurred five months after DOSH opened
3 the follow-up inspection, DOSH served Meta with the Order and Notice of Immediate Restraint
4 that is attached as Exhibit A, alleging that employees at Matrix were in imminent danger of
5 death or serious physical harm. DOSH did not give Meta any prior notice that it was
6 considering issuing an order of immediate restraint, did not attempt to obtain Meta’s agreement
7 to voluntarily shut down any part of the Matrix facility prior to issuing the Order, and did not
8 explain what Meta must do to avoid such a shut-down prior to issuing the Order. Even now, it
9 remains unclear to Meta what specifically DOSH wants Meta to do in order to lift the Order.
10 13. The Order requires Meta to “[s]top all hazardous substances work” inside the
11 Matrix facility until Meta provides DOSH with documentation that it is compliant with
22 14. Upon receiving the Order, Meta immediately ceased operations in the Matrix
23 facility’s cleanroom. Meta continues to comply with the Order in all respects.
24 15. Since the Order was issued, DOSH has clarified and narrowed the scope of the
25 Order for Meta in certain respects. But the Order continues to prohibit Meta from engaging in
26 work practices covered in DOSH’s investigation, and it remains unclear to Meta what
27 specifically DOSH wants Meta to do in order for DOSH to lift the Order.
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
PETITION FOR REVIEW - 4 Seattle, WA 98104-1640
206.622.3150 main · 206.757.7700 fax
1 16. During the December 18 closing conference, DOSH also told Meta that it would
2 be issuing two additional WISHA citations to Meta: one for an alleged “failure to abate” the
3 hazards alleged in Citation No. 317969023 and another for additional hazards DOSH claims to
4 have found at the Matrix facility. Meta has not, however, received those citations yet.
7 Restraint within 10 working days of the effective date of the order by petitioning the superior
8 court of the county wherein the condition exists. RCW 49.17.130(3). Upon the filing of such a
9 petition, the superior court has jurisdiction to grant all appropriate relief. Id. Meta has timely
10 filed this Petition contesting the Order that DOSH issued in this case.
12 extraordinary circumstances. Specifically, DOSH may issue such orders only if upon
13 inspection or investigation DOSH believes an employer has violated a WISHA standard and
14 the “violation is such that a danger exists from which there is a substantial probability that
15 death or serious physical harm could result to any employee[.]” RCW 49.17.130(1). Because
16 DOSH cannot meet its burden of proving that this standard is met in this case, the Court should
18 19. The Order should also be quashed or vacated because DOSH failed to comply
19 with the statutory procedural requirements and DOSH’s own rules for issuing such orders. For
20 example, WISHA requires orders of immediate restraint to be issued in conjunction with the
21 issuance of a citation that addresses the hazard alleged in the order. RCW 49.17.130(1). Here,
22 however, DOSH issued the Order more than a year after it issued Citation No. 317969023 and
23 prior to issuing the additional citations it told Meta at the December 18, 2023 closing
24 conference that it plans to issue (which citations Meta has yet to receive). The Order also fails
25 to comply with DOSH’s own Compliance Manual, which states that DOSH may issue orders of
27 practice “could reasonably be expected to immediately cause death or serious physical harm”
2 situation or remove employees from exposure to the hazard.” DOSH Compliance Manual, ch.
4 20. The Order should also be quashed or vacated under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because it
5 violates Meta’s due process rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United
6 States Constitution and by Article I, Section 3 of the Washington State Constitution. The Order
7 violates due process by depriving Meta of its property rights before DOSH has proven a
8 violation of any WISHA standard, without advance notice to Meta, and before Meta has been
10 21. In the alternative, the Court should modify or narrow the Order because the
11 Order as drafted is vague, ambiguous, and grossly overbroad. While DOSH has subsequently
12 clarified and narrowed the scope of the order for Meta in certain respects, it remains unclear to
13 Meta exactly what DOSH is requiring Meta to do in order for DOSH to lift the Order.
14 22. The Court should also issue declaratory relief under RCW 7.24.010 et seq.,
15 RCW 49.17.130(3), and other applicable law. The allegations set forth herein constitute an
16 actual dispute between the parties and a justiciable controversy. Petitioner is entitled to a
17 determination of questions of construction or validity arising with respect to the Order and
18 RCW 49.17.130 and to a declaration of rights pursuant to RCW 7.24.020, RCW 49.17.130(3),
19 and the common law regarding declaratory judgments. Petitioner asks that this Court declare
20 that the Order is null and void for failure to comply with RCW 49.17.130 and the other reasons
22 23. The Court should also grant injunctive relief to Meta under RCW 7.40.010 et
23 seq. and other applicable law. Meta has a clear legal or equitable right to prevent the
24 enforcement of the Order, which affects its property interests. Meta has suffered and will
25 continue to suffer actual and substantial injury from the restrictions the Order places on Meta’s
26 property rights. By requiring several work practices in the Matrix facility’s cleanroom to cease,
27 the Order imposes significant ongoing costs on Meta which Meta will not be able to recover,
3 against DOSH prohibiting DOSH from enforcing the Order against Meta.
7 requests for production and the ability to take depositions, so that Petitioner has the opportunity
8 to gather necessary facts to further support this Petition, protect its constitutional rights, and
10 B. An order setting a briefing schedule so that Petitioner may fully brief the issues
12 C. A judgment of this Court quashing or vacating the Order in its entirety or in part,
13 or, in the alternative, modifying the terms of the Order, for failure to comply with the
14 requirements of RCW 49.17.130 and the other reasons set forth herein.
17 E. A declaratory judgment against Defendants that the Order is null and void for
20 Petitioner violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I,
22 G. An order retaining jurisdiction in this matter to enforce the Court’s rulings and
26 I. Such other, further, and additional relief as the Court deems just, equitable, and
27 appropriate.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27