Plaintiff
- Name: Rosemarie Ramirez
- Filing Date: May 5, 2026
- Court: United States District Court Northern District of Illinois
- State: Illinois
- Attorney Firm: Stein Saks, PLLC
Defendant
- Name: Duluth Holdings, Inc.
- Website: www.duluthtrading.com
- Industry: Apparel
- Standards Cited: WCAG 2.1
- Summary: Offers a retail platform for apparel and accessories, including shirts, outerwear, and workwear items, with features for browsing and purchasing online.
Case Summary
According to the complaint, plaintiff Rosemarie Ramirez, a visually-impaired individual, is suing Duluth Holdings, Inc. for failing to make its website, www.duluthtrading.com, accessible to blind users. The plaintiff alleges that the website contains numerous barriers that prevent her from completing purchases, including missing alt-text and broken links. The complaint cites violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and seeks a permanent injunction to require the defendant to make its website compliant with accessibility standards. The plaintiff represents a class of legally blind individuals who have faced similar issues accessing the website.
Causes of Action
- Violations of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182 et seq.
- Declaratory Relief
Key Allegations
- Defendant's website is not accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
- Plaintiff encountered barriers preventing her from completing a purchase on the website.
- Defendant has failed to comply with WCAG 2.1 guidelines.
Requested Relief
- A preliminary and permanent injunction to prohibit Defendant from violating the ADA.
- An injunction requiring Defendant to make its website fully compliant with the ADA.
- A declaration that Defendant's website discriminates against the blind.
- Certification of the Class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23.
- Payment of nominal damages.
- Pre- and post-judgment interest.
- An award of costs and expenses of this action.
Proposed Class
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.
Jurisdiction & Venue
This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 42 U.S.C. § 12182; venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §1391(b)(1) and (2).
