WRIGHT v. THE FINISH LINE, INC. DBA JD SPORTS

• Defendant’s Website is so constructed that the size chart does not open when the screen reader is activated. When using the screen reader, the size chart will not open, no matter which browser is used by the user. The size guide link is announced but the link will not open using the screen reader.
• The Website contains a dialog box in which the user can choose a store, but these boxes are unlabeled. The dialog does inform users to select a store, but when they press the Tab key, the “close” button is unlabeled, so users only hear “button.” Then the text field is announced as “blank.” If the user then switches to arrow key navigation, the user will hear the search icon announced only as “clickable.” Then the right arrow is announced as “clickable” again.
• Defendant’s Website contains text that may be unreadable to a partially blind user as it has an insufficient color contrast. The white letters in the light green buttons do not meet the minimum threshold requirements which may impact low-vision and color-blind users. The color contrast between the background and font color must be a minimum of 4.5:1 This text has a contrast ratio of 1.84:1.

Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.

• 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 relevant implementing regulations of the ADA, in that Defendant took no action that was reasonably calculated to ensure that its website was 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 website into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that its website is fully accessible to, and independently usable by, blind individuals, and which further 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 them to remain fully in compliance with the law—the specific injunctive relief requested by Plaintiff is described more fully in paragraph 11 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 Gniewkowski v. Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-01898-AJS (W.D. Pa. Jan. 11, 2018) (ECF 191) (“Plaintiffs, as the prevailing party, may file a fee petition before the Court surrenders jurisdiction. Pursuant to Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens’ Council for Clean Air, 478 U.S. 546, 559 (1986), supplemented, 483 U.S. 711 (1987), the fee petition may include costs to monitor Defendant’s compliance with the permanent injunction.”); see also Access Now, Inc. v. Lax World, LLC, No. 1:17-cv-10976-DJC (D. Mass. Apr. 17, 2018) (ECF 11) (same)
• The provision of whatever other relief the Court deems just, equitable and appropriate
• An Order retaining jurisdiction over this case until Defendant has complied with the Court’s Orders.