Can we count your visit?

Our analytics service records the pages you view, so we can see which ones are useful. It saves a random ID in your browser, and we never use it for advertising. Read our privacy policy.

Geovanni Bahena Figueroa v. Designs for Health, Inc.

Filed

Case details

Standards cited
WCAG 2.1

Summary

According to the complaint, plaintiff Geovanni Bahena Figueroa, a visually-impaired individual, is suing Designs for Health, Inc. for failing to make its website, www.designsforhealth.com, accessible under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The plaintiff alleges that he encountered numerous barriers while attempting to access the website to purchase a probiotic product, which prevented him from fully utilizing the site. The complaint cites specific access issues such as missing alt-text and broken links, which hinder the experience for blind users. The plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to require the defendant to make the website compliant with accessibility standards and to implement policies ensuring ongoing accessibility.

About the defendant

Offers science-based nutritional supplements, including probiotics, vitamins, minerals, and botanicals.

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

  • Defendant's website is not accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
  • Plaintiff encountered multiple access barriers preventing full use of the website.
  • Defendant has failed to comply with WCAG 2.1 guidelines.

Legal claims

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

  • Violations of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182 et seq.
  • Declaratory Relief

What the plaintiff asks for

What the plaintiff wants the court to order.

  • Permanent injunction requiring compliance with the ADA.
  • Certification of the Class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23.
  • Payment of nominal damages.

Proposed class

The group of people the plaintiff asks to represent, so the case can cover them too.

All legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted to access Defendant’s Website and as a result have been denied access to the equal enjoyment of goods and services, during the relevant statutory period.