Sheila Biglang-awa v. Asics America Corporation

Summary

On July 18, 2019, Sheila Biglang-Awa filed a Complaint in California State court against Asics America Corporation . Plaintiff Sheila Biglang-Awa alleges that www.asics.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.0, Section 508 accessibility standard(s).

About the defendant

ASICS America Corporation is a leading designer, manufacturer and marketer of athletic shoes, apparel, and accessories

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

• The home page has graphics, links, and buttons that are not labeled or are incorrectly labeled, or lack alternative text ("Alt-text")
• Plaintiff encountered multiple unlabeled or mislabeled buttons and links
• Plaintiff encountered multiple pages containing insufficient navigational headings requiring Plaintiff to expend substantial additional time to access information
• Plaintiff was unable to make a purchase because of an inaccessible checkout system

Legal claims

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

• Violation of Unruh Civil Rights Act (California Civil Code §§ 51 et seq.)

What the plaintiff asks for

What the plaintiff wants the court to order.

• A Declaratory Judgment that at the commencement ofthis action Defendant owns, maintains, and/or operates its Website in a manner which discriminates against the blind, fails to provide access to blind or visually-impaired individuals, and that Defendant took no action that was reasonably calculated to ensure that its Website is fully accessible to, and independently usable by blind and visuawy-impaired individuals in violation of California’s Unruh Act, California Civil Code $ 51, er seq
• A preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining Defendant from further violations ofthe UCRA, Civil Code II 51 er seq. with respect to "www.asics.com."
• A preliminary and permanent injunction requiring Defendant to take the steps necessary to make www.asics.com readily accessible to and usable by blind and visuallyimpaired individuals but Plaintiff hereby expressly limits the injunctive reliefto require that Defendant expend no more than $50,000 thereon
• An award of statutory minimum statutory damages of not less than $4,000 per violation pursuant to tj 52(a} ofthe California Civil Code
• An additional award of $4,000.00 as deterrence damages for each violation pursuant to Johnson v. Guedoir, 218 F. Supp. 3d 1096; 2016 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 150740 (USDC 5 Cal, E.D. 2016)
• For attorneys’ees and expenses pursuant to all applicable laws including, without limitation, Civil Code $ 52(a)
• For pre-judgment interest to the extent permitted by law
• For costs ofsuit
• For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper