1 FILED

2024 JAN 03 01:19 PM

2 KING COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT CLERK
3 E-FILED
CASE #: 24-2-00148-4 SEA
4

7 SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON

FOR KING COUNTY
8
9 META PLATFORMS TECHNOLOGIES,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, No.
10
Petitioner, PETITION FOR REVIEW OF
11 ORDER OF IMMEDIATE
v. RESTRAINT PURSUANT TO RCW
12 49.17.130 AND FOR
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND DECLARATORY AND
13 INDUSTRIES OF THE STATE OF INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
WASHINGTON, a Washington state agency,
14 and JOEL SACKS, in his official capacity as
Director of the Department of Labor and
15 Industries of the State of Washington,
16 Defendants.
17

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

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
PETITION FOR REVIEW - 1 Seattle, WA 98104-1640
206.622.3150 main · 206.757.7700 fax
 1 any workplace safety rule, without notice or a hearing and before Meta has been given a

2 meaningful opportunity to be heard.

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.

7 2. Defendant Washington Department of Labor and Industries is an agency of the

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

11 administration of RCW 49.17 et seq.

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

15 restraining any condition of employment or practice issued pursuant to RCW 49.17.130(1).

16 This Court has jurisdiction to grant appropriate relief pursuant to RCW 49.17.130(3).

17 5. Venue is proper in King County Superior Court 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.

20 IV. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

21 6. Meta operates a research and development facility, known as the “Matrix”

22 facility, at 9461 Willows Road, Redmond, Washington 98502. Much of the Matrix facility’s

23 research and development is conducted in the “cleanroom,” which is an enclosed, specially

24 designed space engineered to filter pollutants such as dust, airborne microbes, and aerosol

25 particles to provide the cleanest environment possible. Meta incorporates a number of

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.

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
PETITION FOR REVIEW - 2 Seattle, WA 98104-1640
206.622.3150 main · 206.757.7700 fax
 1 7. In June 2022, DOSH opened an inspection of the Matrix facility for alleged

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

8 actually prove that Meta has violated any WISHA standard.

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

13 stay failed to meet that standard.

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

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
PETITION FOR REVIEW - 3 Seattle, WA 98104-1640
206.622.3150 main · 206.757.7700 fax
 1 12. On December 18, 2023, DOSH held a closing conference with Meta regarding

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

12 WISHA. The Order states that Meta must:

13 1) Identify all hazardous substances and conditions present using

site analysis and applicable L&I permissible exposure limits.
14 Perform a comprehensive risk assessment to determine
contaminants to control; this would include recipes and
15 byproducts. Provide appropriate gas detection instruments and
provide effective training on how to detect atmospheric
16 conditions.

17 2) Determine level of respiratory protection required by

conducting employee personal-exposure evaluation and/or
18 determine and enforce proper selection of respirators during
emergency events for instances including:
19 a) Exposure to unknown atmospheric conditions during
emergency response
20 b) Exposure to toxic chemicals, asphyxiant gases, or
unknown byproducts from tools during evacuation
21 (escape respirators).

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.

5 V. REASONS RELIEF SHOULD BE GRANTED

6 17. WISHA grants employers the right to contest an Order and Notice of Immediate

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.

11 18. WISHA authorizes DOSH to issue orders of immediate restraint only in

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

17 quash or vacate the Order issued to Meta.

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

26 immediate restraint only in “imminent danger” situations where a workplace condition or

27 practice “could reasonably be expected to immediately cause death or serious physical harm”

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
PETITION FOR REVIEW - 5 Seattle, WA 98104-1640
206.622.3150 main · 206.757.7700 fax
 1 and only “when an employer cannot, or does not, voluntarily eliminate the imminent danger

2 situation or remove employees from exposure to the hazard.” DOSH Compliance Manual, ch.

3 4 § A.1 at 4-1 (emphasis added).

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

9 given a meaningful opportunity to be heard.

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

21 set forth herein.

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,

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
PETITION FOR REVIEW - 6 Seattle, WA 98104-1640
206.622.3150 main · 206.757.7700 fax
 1 even if Meta eventually prevails in this action or its appeal of Citation No. 317969023. Meta

2 therefore is entitled to injunctive relief, including a preliminary and permanent injunction

3 against DOSH prohibiting DOSH from enforcing the Order against Meta.

4 VI. RELIEF REQUESTED

5 WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully prays for the following relief:

6 A. An order authorizing expedited discovery, including written interrogatories and

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

9 explore Defendants’ evidentiary basis for issuing the Order.

10 B. An order setting a briefing schedule so that Petitioner may fully brief the issues

11 in this appeal to the Court.

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.

15 D. Preliminary and permanent injunctive relief prohibiting Defendants from

16 enforcing the Order in its entirety or in part.

17 E. A declaratory judgment against Defendants that the Order is null and void for

18 failure to comply with RCW 49.17.130.

19 F. A declaratory judgment against Defendants that the Order as applied to

20 Petitioner violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I,

21 Section 3 of the Washington State Constitution.

22 G. An order retaining jurisdiction in this matter to enforce the Court’s rulings and

23 to entertain other appropriate motions or applications relating to this matter.

24 H. An award of attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in this action as allowed by 42

25 U.S.C. § 1988 and other applicable law.

26 I. Such other, further, and additional relief as the Court deems just, equitable, and

27 appropriate.

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
PETITION FOR REVIEW - 7 Seattle, WA 98104-1640
206.622.3150 main · 206.757.7700 fax
 1 DATED this 3rd day of January, 2024.

2 DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP

Attorneys for Petitioner
3

4 By /s/ Jeffrey B. Youmans

Jeffrey B. Youmans, WSBA #26604
5 David A. Nordlinger, WSBA #59545
920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
6 Seattle, WA 98104-1610
Telephone: 206-622-3150
7 Fax: 206-757-7700
E-mail: jeffreyyoumans@dwt.com
8 davidnordlinger@dwt.com
9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18
19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
PETITION FOR REVIEW - 8 Seattle, WA 98104-1640
206.622.3150 main · 206.757.7700 fax
Exhibit A