Do No Harm v. Pfizer, 126 F.4th 109

Pfizer launched the Breakthrough Fellowship Program in 2021 to increase minority representation, specifically targeting Black/African American, Latino/Hispanic, and Native American students for a multi-stage educational and employment program.
Do No Harm, a nonprofit whose members include students and healthcare professionals, alleged that Pfizer’s Fellowship unlawfully excluded white and Asian-American applicants, violating federal and state laws.
Do No Harm filed suit on behalf of its (anonymous) members, some of whom claimed they would apply for the fellowship if not for the racial criteria.
The District Court dismissed the case for lack of standing, concluding that Do No Harm failed to identify injured members by name or show members were "able and ready" to apply but for alleged discrimination.
On appeal, Do No Harm contested only the dismissal (not the denial of preliminary injunction), arguing that standing at the dismissal stage should be judged by the pleadings, not the heightened evidentiary standard required for injunctive relief.
The Second Circuit vacated the dismissal and remanded for the District Court to assess standing under the less stringent pleading standard, allowing the suit to potentially proceed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Proper standard for standing at dismissal stage	Pleading stage standard applies; allegations suffice	District Court correctly used higher standard from injunction context	District Court applied wrong standard; pleading standard is correct
Need to name individual injured members at pleading stage	Not required to name at pleading stage; pseudonyms suffice	Plaintiffs must identify injured members by name	Naming not required at pleading stage
Evidence required to show member was "able and ready" to apply	Alleged facts about readiness are sufficient at complaint stage	Evidence was insufficient and conclusory	At pleading stage, general factual allegations suffice
Immediate dismissal after failing to show standing at preliminary injunction	Dismissal improper if complaint alleges standing	Failure to show standing warranted full dismissal	Failure at injunction stage does not warrant dismissal at pleading stage

Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490 (1975) (associational standing requirements)
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing must be established for each stage of litigation; requirements for allegations at pleading stage)
Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 555 U.S. 488 (2009) (discussion on need to name members for organizational standing)
Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Comm'n, 432 U.S. 333 (1977) (test for associational standing)
Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003) (able and ready standard in discrimination standing)
International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 324 (1977) (futility doctrine for standing in discrimination cases)
Cacchillo v. Insmed, Inc., 638 F.3d 401 (2d Cir. 2011) (burden for standing at different litigation stages)
Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83 (1998) (jurisdictional prerequisites for adjudication)
Building and Construction Trades Council of Buffalo v. Downtown Development, Inc., 448 F.3d 138 (2d Cir. 2006) (need not name specific members for associational standing at the pleading stage)