Plaintiff
- Name: TIMOTHY HERNANDEZ
- Filing Date: October 10, 2025
- Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
- State: New York
- Attorney Firm: STEIN SAKS, PLLC
Defendant
- Name: GOGO FURNITURE CORPORATION
- Website: www.gogofurniture.com
- Industry: Retailing
- Summary: Offers a wide range of furniture collections and bedding products for online sale, including options for product updates and promotions.
Case Summary
According to the complaint, Timothy Hernandez, a visually impaired individual, is suing Gogo Furniture Corporation for failing to make their website, www.gogofurniture.com, accessible to blind users. The complaint alleges that the website contains numerous barriers that prevent visually impaired individuals from accessing its content and services, violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL). Hernandez claims he attempted to purchase bedding accessories but was unable to due to these access barriers. He seeks a permanent injunction to require Gogo Furniture to comply with accessibility standards and to ensure that their website is usable for individuals with disabilities.
Causes of Action
- Violations of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182 et seq.
- Violations of the NYCHRL
- Declaratory Relief
Key Allegations
- Defendant's website is inaccessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
- Plaintiff was denied full and equal access to the website due to access barriers.
- Defendant failed to comply with WCAG 2.1 guidelines.
Requested Relief
- Permanent injunction requiring Defendant to make the website accessible.
- Compensatory damages for violations of civil rights under New York City Human Rights Law.
- Certification of the Class and Sub-Classes.
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, and venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §1391(b)(1) and (2).




Comments