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.

Xinyue Hippe v. Henry Rose, Inc.

Filed

Case details

Standards cited
WCAG 2.2

Summary

According to the complaint, Xinyue Hippe, a visually impaired individual, is suing Henry Rose, Inc. for failing to make its website, https://henryrose.com, accessible to blind and visually impaired users. Hippe alleges that the website contains significant access barriers that prevent her from independently navigating and completing transactions, violating her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The complaint details various specific accessibility issues encountered by Hippe, including inaccessible navigation menus and lack of proper labeling for interactive elements. Hippe seeks a permanent injunction to require the defendant to make the website accessible and compensatory damages for herself and other class members who have faced similar discrimination.

About the defendant

Provides consumers access to a wide array of goods and services, including the ability to purchase fragrances and scented items such as perfumes, body creams, candles, and hand sanitizers.

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

  • Website is not accessible to visually impaired individuals
  • Access barriers prevent independent navigation and transactions
  • Defendant has failed to comply with ADA requirements

Legal claims

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

  • Violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
  • Declaratory Relief

What the plaintiff asks for

What the plaintiff wants the court to order.

  • Permanent injunction requiring Defendant to make the Website accessible
  • Compensatory damages for Class Members
  • Certification of the case as a class action

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 the Website and as a result have been denied access to the enjoyment of goods and services offered by the Website, during the relevant statutory period.