Plaintiff
- Name: Jenisa Angeles
- Filing date: August 17, 2020
- State of filing: New York
Defendant
- Name: Rosle USA Corp.
- Website: www.rosele.com
- Industry: Consumer Goods
- Summary: Rosle USA is the US subsidiary of the German grill and cookware company, Rosle.
Case Summary
On August 17, 2020, Jenisa Angeles filed a Complaint in New York Federal court against Rosle USA Corp.. Plaintiff Jenisa Angeles alleges that www.rosele.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.1 accessibility standard(s).
Case Details
Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:
- For example, many features on the Website lacks alt. text, which is the invisible code embedded beneath a graphical image. As a result, Plaintiff was unable to differentiate what products were on the screen due to the failure of the Website to adequately describe its content.
- Many features on the Website also fail to contain a proper label element or title attribute for each field. This is a problem for the visually impaired because the screen reader fails to communicate the purpose of the page element. It also leads to the user not being able to understand what he or she is expected to insert into the subject field. As a result, Plaintiff was unable to enjoy the privileges and benefits of the Website equally to sighted users.
- Many pages on the Website also contain the same title elements. This was a problem for Plaintiff because in certain instances the screen reader failed to distinguish one page from another. In order to fix this problem, Defendant must change the title elements for each page.
- The Website also contains a host of broken links, which is a hyperlink to a nonexistent or empty webpage. For the visually impaired this is especially paralyzing due to the inability to navigate or otherwise determine where one is on the website once a broken link is encountered. For example, upon coming across a link of interest, Plaintiff was redirected to an error page. However, the screen-reader failed to communicate that the link was broken. As a result, Plaintiff could not get back to his original search.
Plaintiff asserts the following cause(s) of action in its Complaint:
- Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.
- New York City Human Rights Law
- Declaratory Relief
Plaintiff seeks the following relief by way of its Complaint:
- A preliminary and permanent injunction to prohibit Defendant from violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12182, et seq., N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107, et seq., and the laws of New York;
- A preliminary and permanent injunction requiring Defendant to take all the steps necessary to make its Website into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that the Website is readily accessible to and usable by blind individuals;
- A declaration that Defendant owns, maintains and/or operates its Website in a manner that discriminates against the blind and which fails to provide access for persons with disabilities as required by Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12182, et seq., N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107, et seq., and the laws of New York
- An order certifying the Class and Sub-Classes under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) & (b)(2) and/or (b)(3), appointing Plaintiff as Class Representative, and her attorneys as Class Counsel;
- Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined by proof, including all applicable statutory and punitive damages and fines, to Plaintiff and the proposed class and subclasses for violations of their civil rights under New York City Human Rights Law and City Law;
- Pre- and post-judgment interest;
- An award of costs and expenses of this action together with reasonable attorneys’ and expert fees; and
- Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.