Trujillo v. Chaudhary

Opinion

JOSE TRUJILLO, No. 1:22-cv-00969-ADA-SKO Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING v. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN PART HARBIR CHAUDHARY, individually and dba 99 Food Market & Gasoline, et al., (ECF Nos. 20, 22) Defendants.

On August 3, 2022, Plaintiff Jose Trujillo filed a complaint against Defendants alleging claims under the American with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act (“Unruh Act”), and California’s Health and Safety Code. (ECF No. 1.) The complaint seeks an award of statutory damages, injunctive and declaratory relief, and attorney’s fees and costs. (Id.) Plaintiff alleges that Defendants own, operate, and/or lease the property that is the subject of this suit, 99 Food Market & Gasoline (the “Facility”), located at 1357 South K Street, Tulare, California 93274. (Id. ¶¶ 1, 7.) Plaintiff further alleges that he is substantially limited in his ability to walk and he uses a wheelchair or cane for mobility, and the Facility presents numerous architectural barriers that interfered with his ability to use and enjoy the goods, services, privileges, and accommodations offered therein. (Id. ¶¶ 8, 10.) According to the proofs of service filed by Plaintiff, Defendants were served with copies of the summons and complaint on October 17, 2022, and subsequently mailed to the same address. (ECF Nos. 4, 5; see also ECF No. 20-2 ¶ 12.) Neither Defendant has filed an answer or taken any action expressing an intent to defend against the lawsuit. (See Docket.) Plaintiff requested entry of default against Defendants on November 11, 2022, which was entered by the Clerk of Court a few days later. (ECF Nos. 7, 8.) On April 20, 2023, Plaintiff filed his original motion for default judgment. (ECF No. 11.) This Court subsequently adopted the findings and recommendation, recommending the Court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction and Plaintiff’s state law claims be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4) and Vo v. Choi, 49 F.4th 1167 (9th Cir. 2022). (ECF No. 19.) This Court also denied Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment subject to being renewed as to his remaining ADA claim. (Id.) On August 7, 2023, Plaintiff filed a renewed motion for default judgment. (ECF No. 20.) The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On September 22, 2023, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment in part. (ECF No. 22.) Those findings and recommendations contained notice that the parties had twenty-one days to file objections. (Id. at 14.) That deadline has passed, and no party has filed objections or otherwise contacted the Court. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Accordingly, 1. The findings and recommendations issued on September 22, 2023, (ECF No. 22), are ADOPTED in FULL; 2. Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment, (ECF No. 20), is GRANTED in part; 3. Defendants are found and declared to be, jointly and severally, in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act; 4. Plaintiff is awarded reasonable attorney’s fees in the amount of $1,650.00 (5.5 hours at $300 per hour), paralegal fees in the amount of $529.00 (4.6 hours at $115 per hour), and costs of suit in the amount of $908.07; and 5. Defendants are ordered to make the following modifications to the property known as 99 Food Market & Gasoline, located at 1357 South K Street in Tulare, California (the “Facility”), such that each item is brought into compliance with the accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and California Code of Regulations, Title 24, as follows: a. Provide a properly configured and identified accessible fuel pump; b. Provide a properly configured and identified designated accessible parking stall with adjacent access aisle; C. Provide a properly configured accessible route of travel from the fuel pumps to the Facility’s entrance; d. Provide a properly configured accessible curb ramp leading to the Facility’s entrance; e. Provide a properly configured accessible Facility entrance with a properly configured threshold; f. Provide and maintain clear width of the routes of travel through public areas of the interior of the Facility; and g. Provide a properly configured accessible transaction counter; and 6. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff, and against Defendants, and thereafter to CLOSE this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. * Dated: _ October 20, 2023 UNITED f£TATES DISTRICT JUDGE