Amidax Trading Group v. S.W.I.F.T. Scrl
671 F.3d 140
| 2d Cir. | 2011Background
- Amidax Trading Group, a New Jersey sole proprietorship, sued SWIFT entities, the U.S. Treasury, the CIA, and officials, challenging government access to SWIFT data under several constitutional and privacy statutes.
- The Terrorist Finance Tracking Program (TFTP) allowed the government to access SWIFT records via OFAC subpoenas, with safeguards evolving over time.
- SWIFT initially could not extract targeted data, leading to negotiations to scope disclosure and implement privacy safeguards.
- The district court dismissed in February 2009 for lack of Article III standing, finding Amidax failed to show a concrete, particularized injury.
- Amidax argued that its information was on SWIFT’s database and that SWIFT turned over its data to the government, potentially injuring Amidax.
- Amidax filed a postjudgment motion for reconsideration, which the district court denied in April 2009; this court affirmed the dismissal and denial on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Amidax has standing to sue. | Amidax alleges its data was in SWIFT and possibly handed over. | SWIFT and defendants contend there is no plausible injury-in-fact. | Amidax lacks standing; injury not plausibly shown. |
| Whether the district court erred in denying jurisdictional discovery. | Discovery could reveal whether data was disclosed to the government. | Discovery premature without concrete injury allegations. | No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed. |
| Whether Amidax should be allowed to amend its complaint after jurisdictional discovery. | Leave to amend would be futile; amendment denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing requires concrete injury, causation, redressability)
- Woods v. Empire Health Choice, Inc., 574 F.3d 92 (2d Cir. 2009) (standing requires injury in fact that is concrete and particularized)
- Selevan v. N.Y. Thruway Auth., 584 F.3d 82 (2d Cir. 2009) (standing; plausible injury in fact)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility standard for pleading sufficient facts)
- APWU v. Potter, 343 F.3d 619 (2d Cir. 2003) (need for plaintiff to present jurisdictional evidence)