While saying she agrees the accusations in the lawsuit are "quite problematic," a federal judge in San Francisco said the law and rules on jurisdiction won't allow her to let a gay couple - which includes a Saudi national - from using California courts to continue their lawsuit against German airline Lufthansa for allegedly improperly revealing the men's U.S. marital status to the government of Saudi Arabia, where homosexuality remains illegal.
On March 29, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston filed an order in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, granting Lufthansa's motion for summary judgment in the case. In that ruling, Illston said she determined she and other U.S. judges lack jurisdiction over the men's claims.
The lawsuit was filed in 2023, initially in San Francisco County Superior Court, against Lufthansa, formally known as Deutsche Lufthansa Aktiengesellschaft. Lufthansa removed the case to federal court, where they moved for a quick judgment, saying the court lacked jurisdiction to consider the men's legal claims.
The lawsuit was filed by two men, a gay couple who married under California law in 2013. They are identified only as John Doe and Robert Roe. Doe is a U.S. citizen and legal resident of California, who allegedly lives in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia most of the year. Roe is a Saudi Arabian citizen, who had lived full-time in Riyadh, where he worked as a real estate investor.
However, since 2021, Roe has allegedly been forced to remain in the U.S., out of fear of legal reprisals and prosecution in his native country, should he return, after his government learned he was gay and married to another man. The Saudi Arabian government has enshrined in law strict interpretations of Islamic moral and religious law, which forbids homosexuality and can punish people convicted of the offense by a range of severe punishments. Published reports have indicated this has included imprisonment, flogging and even death.
According to court documents, Roe and Doe had remained in a committed relationship for over 30 years, while keeping their relationship secret from the government and even family and friends in Saudi Arabia. However, the relationship allegedly was revealed in 2021, when Roe attempted to once again visit Doe in California, amid Covid travel restrictions.
At that time, foreign nationals from Saudi Arabia were only allowed to enter the U.S. if they had a close familial relationship with someone in the U.S.
Roe attempted to use his marital status to abide by those restrictions and enter the U.S. According to court documents, he intentionally chose to fly Lufthansa, believing a German airline would allow him to enter the U.S., but not reveal his sexuality and marital status to the Saudi government in the process.
However, according to court documents, at the gate, a Lufthansa manager, who was believed to be a Pakistani Muslim, loudly revealed marital status, allegedly allowing others around to hear.
The court documents state a German national manager at the Riyadh airport declined to intervene.
Roe was ultimately allowed to board and fly to California. And according to court documents, Roe and Doe claim Lufthansa assured them it had deleted all record of their interaction at the airport.
However, Roe and Doe claim Roe's status in records maintained by the Saudi Arabian government was changed without his knowledge or consent from single to married.
Roe and Doe say this means the Saudi government still learned of Roe's status from his interaction with Lufthansa employees, either by monitoring official Lufthansa communications or through informants planted within Lufthansa's workforce at the Riyadh airport.
According to court documents, the U.S. government has advised Roe not to return to Saudi Arabia. Roe said he has been granted a provisional green card, allowing him to remain in the U.S. and he is pursuing U.S. citizenship.
However, Roe and Doe assert Lufthansa still must pay for allegedly allowing the Saudi government to learn of Roe's identity and marital status, blocking him from returning to the country out of concerns for his personal safety at the hands of Saudi authorities.
They claim Lufthansa's alleged actions amount to multiple violations of California law.
While saying she agreed the men's claims were concerning, she agreed with Lufthansa that she cannot hear their case.
The judge particularly cited the "foreign policy overtones" implicated in the case, as the men "claim that the Saudi Arabian government learned of their marital status through covert monitoring of Lufthansa's emails and/or through the use of an informant system."
The judge further noted the case would require her to analyze and interpret European Union and German laws to determine if Lufthansa should pay over the claims in the case.
"The Court is sympathetic to plaintiffs’ assertion that California is the only practical venue for them to pursue their claims, and the allegations of the complaint, taken as true, are quite problematic," the judge said. "However, in light of all of the foregoing, the Court concludes that this Court lacks personal jurisdiction over defendants and that the exercise of jurisdiction would be unreasonable."
Doe and Roe are represented by attorneys Donald J. Putterman and Dannielle M. Campbell, of the firm of Putterman Yu Wang, of San Francisco.
Lufthansa is represented in the action by attorneys Ivy L. Nowinski and Anthony Battista, of the firm of Condon & Forsyth, of Los Angeles and New York.