Guglielmo v. ECS Tuning, LLC

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided October 5, 2020·No. 1:20-cv-05368·Unknown

Opinion

Rot A © DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK □□ ie py pe ne wenn nn nnn nnn nnn KX DATE FILED; 10/5/20 JOSEPH GUGLIELMO, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Case No. 1:20-cv-5368 Plaintiffs, -against- ECS TUNING, LLC, Defendant.

CONSENT DECREE 1. This Consent Decree is entered into as of the Effective Date, as defined below in Paragraph 10, by and between the following parties: Plaintiff Joseph Guglielmo (‘Plaintiff’) and Defendant ECS Tuning, LLC (“Defendant”). Plaintiff and Defendant shall hereinafter be collectively referred to as the “Parties” or sometimes individually by “Party” for the purposes and on the terms specified herein. RECITALS 2s Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-12189 (“ADA”) and its implementing regulation, 28 C.F.R. pt. 36, prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations by any private entity that owns, leases (or leases to), or operates any place of public accommodation. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a); 28 C.F.R. § 36.201(a). 3. On or about July 13, 2020, Plaintiff filed an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”), captioned Joseph Guglielmo vy. ECS Tuning, LLC, Case Number: 1:20-cv-05368-ALC (the “Action”). Plaintiff alleges that

4846-2597-7539.1

Defendant’s website, www.ecstuning.com, and mobile applications (the “Website”) are not fully accessible to blind or visually-impaired individuals in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), the New York State Human Rights Law (“NYSHRL’”), and the New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”). 4. Defendant expressly denies that the Website violates any federal, state or local law, including the ADA, NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL, and it denies any other wrongdoing or liability whatsoever. By entry into this Consent Decree, Defendant does not admit any wrongdoing. 5. This Consent Decree resolves, settles, and compromises all issues between the Parties in the Action. 6. This Consent Decree is entered into by Plaintiff, individually, but is intended to inure to the benefit of vision impaired individuals who are members of the class alleged in the Complaint. JURISDICTION 7. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant is a private entity that owns and/or operates the Website which is available through the internet to personal computers, laptops, mobile devices, tablets, and other similar technology. Plaintiff contends that the Website is a service, privilege, or advantage of a place of public accommodation subject to Title II of the ADA. 42 U.S.C. §12181(7); 12182(a). Defendant denies that the Website is a public accommodation or that it is a place of public accommodation or otherwise subject to Title III of the ADA, NYSHRL, and/or NYCHRL.

8. This Court has jurisdiction over the Action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 42 U.S.C. § 12188. The Parties agree that for purposes of the Action and this Consent Decree venue is appropriate. AGREED RESOLUTION 9. Plaintiff and Defendant agree that it is in the Parties’ best interest to resolve the Action on mutually agreeable terms without further litigation. Accordingly, the Parties agree to the entry of this Consent Decree without trial or further adjudication of any issues of fact or law raised in Plaintiffs Complaint. In resolution of this Action, the Parties hereby AGREE to the following: DEFINITIONS 10. Effective Date means the date on which this Consent Decree is entered on the Court’s Docket Sheet following approval by the Court. 11. Reasonable Efforts means, with respect to a given goal or obligation, the efforts that a reasonable person or entity in Defendant's position would use to achieve that goal. or obligation. Any disagreement by the Parties as to whether Defendant has used Reasonable Efforts as provided for under this Consent Decree shall be subject to the dispute resolution procedures set forth in paragraphs 16 through 19 of this Consent Decree. Reasonable Efforts shall be interpreted so as to not require Defendant to undertake efforts the cost, difficulty or impact on the Website of which could constitute an undue burden, as defined in Title III of the ADA but as applied solely to the Website - as though the Website were a standalone business entity, or which efforts could ‘result in a fundamental alteration in the manner in which Defendant operates the Website - or the primary functions related thereto, or which could result in a loss of revenue or traffic on its Website related operations.

4846-2597-75391

TERM 12. The term of this Consent Decree shall commence as of the Effective Date and remain in effect for the earlier of: (1) thirty-six (36) months from the Effective Date; or (b) the date, if any, that the United States Department of Justice adopts regulations for websites under Title II of the ADA. GENERAL NONDISCRIMINATION REQUIREMENTS 13. Pursuant to the terms of this Consent Decree, Defendant: a. shall use Reasonable Efforts to provide persons with a disability (as defined under the ADA), including Plaintiff, an equal opportunity to participate in or benefit from the goods, services, privileges, advantages, and accommodations provided through the Website as - set forth herem. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(), (iw; 28 C.F.R. § 36.202(a), (b); and b. shall use Reasonable Efforts to ensure that persons with a disability (as defined under the ADA), including Plaintiff, are not excluded, denied services, segregated, or otherwise treated differently because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services, through the Website as set forth herein. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii); 28 C.F.R. § 36.303. COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE Ill OF THE ADA 14. Web Accessibility Conformance Timeline: Defendant shall ensure full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, privileges, advantages, and accommodations provided by and through the Website (or any successor website) according to the following timeline and requirements provided that the following dates will be extended in the instance

that the Department of Justice issues regulations for websites under Title II of the ADA while this Consent Decree is in effect and which contain compliance dates and/or deadlines further in the future than the dates set forth herein: a. Within twenty-four (24) months of the Effective Date, the Defendant shall modify the Websites as needed to substantially conform to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 and/or Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.1 Level A and AA Success Criteria to the extent determined to be applicable in such a manner so that the Websites will be accessible to persons with vision disabilities. b. The Parties acknowledge that Defendant’s obligations under this .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Guglielmo v. ECS Tuning, LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2020).

Guglielmo v. ECS Tuning, LLC (Guglielmo v. ECS Tuning, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kozlowski v. Coughlin
871 F.2d 241 (Second Circuit, 1989)