Rimini v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.

Background

Thomas Rimini, a self-represented attorney and former JPMC employee, sued J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX). He alleged that JPMC violated SOX’s protections against retaliation by failing to rehire him and by blacklisting him with potential employers. The action was based on a whistleblower complaint Rimini filed with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in July 2016.

OSHA investigated and issued preliminary findings on October 14, 2016. OSHA concluded that Rimini had not shown an adverse employment action and informed him that he had 30 days to object and request a hearing before an administrative law judge. The findings stated that they would become final and not subject to court review if no timely objection was filed. Rimini did not docket an appeal with the Department of Labor’s Office of Administrative Law Judges until May 14, 2021, more than four years later.

Rimini then filed this federal action. JPMC moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim, arguing that the claims were barred by a prior judgment, that Rimini had not exhausted the required administrative process, that the claims were untimely, and that he had not adequately alleged a SOX claim. JPMC also sought an injunction under the All Writs Act that would have required Rimini to obtain the court’s permission before suing JPMC again. Rimini moved to stay the case or dismiss it for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, arguing that Department of Labor proceedings were still ongoing.

Jurisdiction and exhaustion

The court treated Rimini’s motion as a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), which challenges the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction—the court’s legal power to hear a case. Under Second Circuit precedent, SOX’s administrative exhaustion requirements are a jurisdictional prerequisite to bringing a claim in federal court.

The court explained that a SOX claimant must first file with OSHA and, after receiving OSHA’s preliminary findings, must object and request a hearing within 30 days. If the claimant does not do so, the findings become final and are not subject to judicial review. Only if the claimant satisfies the applicable deadlines and the Department of Labor has not issued a final decision within the required period may the claimant seek review in federal district court. If the Department issues a timely final decision, judicial review follows a different route in the appropriate court of appeals.

The court rejected Rimini’s argument that an allegedly ongoing administrative investigation deprived the court of jurisdiction. It stated that the 2016 administrative matter had been dismissed after Rimini filed this federal case and that a later OSHA complaint could not eliminate or create jurisdiction over the earlier complaint. Jurisdiction depended on whether Rimini exhausted the process for the 2016 OSHA complaint.

The court concluded that Rimini failed to exhaust that process because he did not appeal OSHA’s October 2016 findings within 30 days. As a result, the court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over his SOX claim.

Disposition

The court granted Rimini’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. It dismissed the case on that basis and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment in JPMC’s favor and close the case.

Because the court lacked jurisdiction, it did not decide the merits of JPMC’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim or its motion for a filing injunction. Both of those motions were denied without prejudice as moot. The court expressly stated that the denial of the filing-injunction motion was not a decision on the merits of that request.