SEATTLE _ A federal judge in Seattle denied a motion to broadly expand a gender-discrimination lawsuit against Microsoft brought by a group of women who had hoped to add thousands of plaintiffs to the case.
The plaintiffs in the case, Moussouris v. Microsoft, sought permission from the judge to create a class-action suit. That would have made it possible for more than 8,600 women to join the case to seek damages from the company.
U.S. District Judge James Robart denied the class-action motion Monday, according to court records. The decision is sealed while Microsoft and the plaintiffs discuss what information must be redacted.
At a hearing this month, Robart had tough questions for the women's lawyers, asking whether there were strong enough similarities between the women's cases to justify a class-action suit.
In a statement, Microsoft said the judge made the "right decision."
Lawyers for the plaintiffs did not respond to a request for comment.
The Microsoft lawsuit has been weaving its way through the court for more than two years, and alleges widespread gender discrimination at the company _ claiming that women in engineering roles were promoted and given raises at a slower rate than men in similar jobs.
It's one of several similar lawsuits against big tech companies in recent years, all taking aim at an industry that they allege favors white men over women and minorities.
Robart's decision does not dismiss the lawsuit against Microsoft, which can still proceed with the named plaintiffs.
In oral arguments on the class-action motion this month, an attorney for Microsoft relied on a 2011 precedent _ a case that has been cited in multiple suits seeking class action. In that case, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a proposed class in a gender-bias case against Walmart, which sought to include about 1.6 million women.
The potential Walmart plaintiffs were all across the country and had different managers and varying stories of gender bias. The court ruled that the plaintiffs did not have similar enough experiences to be considered a class, and did not prove that company policy led to discrimination.
In oral arguments in the Microsoft case, Kelly Dermody, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said Microsoft managers were given little instruction on how to determine pay and promotions, and that lack of structure allowed discrimination.
"Didn't you just drive a wooden stake through the heart of your argument?" Robart asked, pointing out that there must be consistent practices in a class-action suit.
A former Microsoft cybersecurity engineer, Katherine Moussouris, sued Microsoft in September 2015, claiming that less-qualified men had been given raises and promotions over her. She was joined by two other plaintiffs in the case.
Microsoft has denied there is systemic gender discrimination is in its employee reviews, which determine who gets promoted and who gets raises.
A class-action decision in a similar case is pending in California, where a judge heard arguments in May in a gender-bias case against Twitter. Judge Mary E. Wiss has not yet ruled on whether to grant class-action status.
Wiss dismissed a gender-bias case against Google last December, saying the class it proposed was too broad. She allowed the plaintiffs to file an amended lawsuit, which they did in January.
