Anne West v. Icon Health and Fitness Inc.

Summary

On April 29, 2019, Anne West filed a Complaint in Connecticut Federal court against ICON Health & Fitness Inc.. Plaintiff Anne West alleges that www.iconfitness.com, www.ifit.com, www.nordictrack.com, www.proform.com, www.freemotionfitness.com, www.weiderfitness.com, www.weslo.com, www.healthrider.com, www.getgoldsgym.com, www.workoutwarehouse.com, and www.myiconfitness.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.0 accessibility standard(s).

About the defendant

ICON Health & Fitness Inc. sells treadmills and exercise equipment under a number of brand names including Nordic Track, iFit, Health Rider, Lotus, and others.

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

• Websites have features which are accessible to those whoperceive material visually, but not to the visually-disabled.
• Websites do not have clear headings and labels making itimpossible for a user such as the Plaintiff complete a purchase.

Legal claims

The laws the plaintiff says the defendant broke, called causes of action.

• Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.

What the plaintiff asks for

What the plaintiff wants the court to order.

• A Declaratory Judgment that at the commencement of this action Defendant was in violation of the specific requirements of Title III of the ADA described above, and the relevantimplementing regulations of the ADA, in that Defendant took no action that was reasonably calculated to ensure that its Websites are fully accessible to, and independently usable by,individuals with visual disabilities;
• A permanent injunction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12188(a)(2) and 28 CFR § 36.504(a) which directs Defendant to take all steps necessary to bring its Websites into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that its Websites are fully accessible to, and independently usable by, blind individuals, and whichfurther directs that the Court shall retain jurisdiction for a period to be determined to ensure that Defendant has adopted and is following an institutional policy that will in fact cause it to remain fully in compliance with the law—the specific injunctive relief Plaintiff requests is described morefully in paragraph 12 above.
• Payment of actual, statutory, and punitive damages, as the Court deems proper;
• Payment of costs of suit;
• Payment of reasonable attorneys’ fees, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205 and 28 CFR § 36.505, including costs of monitoring Defendant’s compliance with the judgment (see Access Now, Inc. v. Lax World, LLC, No. 1:17-cv-10976-DJC (D. Mass. Apr. 17, 2018) (ECF 11) (“Plaintiffs, as the prevailing party, may file a fee petition before the Court surrenders jurisdiction.
• Whatever other relief the Court deems just, equitable and appropriate; and
• An Order retaining jurisdiction over this case until Defendant has complied with the Court’s Orders.