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.

Mahlberg v. Oakley Inc.

Filed

Case details

Summary

On April 1, 2020, Raymond T. Mahlberg filed a Complaint in Florida Federal court against Oakley, Inc.. Plaintiff Raymond T. Mahlberg alleges that www.oakley.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.0, WCAG 2.1 accessibility standard(s).

About the defendant

Oakley manufactures sunglasses, apparel, and accessories under the Oakley brand name.

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

  • All image elements must have an alt attribute. WCAG 2.0 A F65
  • Duplicate id - the same ID is used on more than one element. WCAG 2.0 A 4.1.1
  • All fieldset elements should be labeled with legend elements. WCAG 2.0 A H71.
  • The aria-labelled by attribute references a non-existent element ID. WCAG 2.0 F68.
  • Button elements containing only an img must have an alt attribute on the img WCAG 2.0 A F65.
  • The label element is blank. WCAG 2.0 A 4.1.2.

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.

  • That the Court issue a Declaratory Judgment that determines that the Defendants' website at the commencement of the subject lawsuit is in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.;
  • That the Court enter an Order directing Defendants to continually update and maintain their computer version of the defendant’s website to ensure that it remains fully accessible to and usable by visually impaired individuals;
  • That the Court issue an Injunctive relief order directing Defendants to alter their website to make it accessible to, and useable by, individuals with disabilities to the full extent required by Title III of the ADA;
  • That the Court enter an Order directing Defendants to evaluate and neutralize their policies and procedures towards persons with disabilities for such reasonable time so as to allow Defendants to undertake and complete corrective procedures;
  • That the Court enter an award of attorney’s fees, costs and litigation expenses pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205; and Title III of the ADA Section 36.505