In Nevada and a federal judge has reportedly dismissed a lawsuit nine women collectively brought against Wynn Resorts Limited concerning claims they had been sexually harassed by the casino firm’s former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Steve Wynn (pictured).

According to a Friday report from the Las Vegas Review-Journal newspaper, the plaintiffs were seeking recompense over allegations that the Las Vegas-headquartered operator had known about its former boss’ actions and subsequently conspired to cover up his misconduct.

Privacy problem:

However, the newspaper reported that Judge James Mahan from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada threw the case out on Wednesday after finding that the plaintiffs had failed to sufficiently defend their decision to use the communal pseudonym of ‘Judy Doe’ rather than their individual real names.

Multiple motives:

The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that the women had claimed that they wished to remain anonymous due to the real threat that they may subsequently become the target of retaliatory defamation lawsuits from 78-year-old Wynn. The plaintiffs purportedly argued that this anonymity would also protect them from being ostracized at work or have their lives upended should the sensitive details of the case be made public.

Deficient declaration:

Judge Mahan reportedly disagreed with these arguments and sided with a federal magistrate judge in finding that the plaintiffs had not sufficiently pled their anonymity request. He furthermore purportedly ruled that the women had failed to convince the court that their privacy interests outweighed the public’s right of access to the judicial proceedings.

Reportedly read Judge Mahan’s ruling…

“Although the plaintiffs wish to preserve their anonymity, this causes several deficiencies in their claims against the Wynn [Resorts Limited] defendants. Throughout their complaint, the plaintiffs use generalized and vague statements without individualized factual support for their allegations.”

Communal charges:

The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that Judge Mahan moreover sided with Wynn Resorts Limited in deciding that the plaintiffs should have followed precedent in citing individual allegations of sexual harassment rather than relying on collective pleading. He additionally purportedly ruled that the women’s formal charges from March of 2018 under the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission were inadmissible due to the fact that they had not been submitted to the court.

Judge Mahan’s ruling reportedly read…

“Though the plaintiffs all allege sexual harassment by Steve Wynn, the individualized acts of sexual harassment are separate transactions or occurrences that must be appropriately pled in order to comply with rule.”

Re-run option:

The newspaper reported that the nine plaintiffs have the ability to appeal Judge Mahan’s ruling while Wynn himself, who is now believed to be living Florida after resigning his positions in February of 2018, has continually maintained his innocence in such matters.