BLACHOWICZ v. PACKAGE FREE, INC.

• Defendant’s Website contains an inaccessible 10%-off pop-up that displays on the homepage. The pop-up does not receive focus when it is displayed, and is not announced to screen reader users, so these users won’t be aware that a pop-up is present nor have access to the information shown in the pop-up.
• Defendant’s Website is so constructed that the carousel for the “Zero Waste Essentials” is not operable with a keyboard. The product names are announced, but a screen reader
  user cannot open any of the items. For example, the user is unable to open any of the items in slide one of the carousel. When the uses presses the enter key, focus leaves the item and jumps to the left navigation arrow without opening anything. This behavior persists each time a user advances
  the slider to a new series of products. On other slides, when a user attempts to open an item, focus again skips back to the left navigation arrow, but jumps all the way back to the first product slider. 
• The advertisement images on Defendant’s homepage are not accessible. The homepage has a carousel with multiple images that rotate automatically. The images are not labeled, and the content is not announced. Each image is announced as “clickable list clickable.” In the example below, it can be seen that a 50% sale for 24 hours only was shown in the first slider
  image, but the image label and content were not announced.

Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.

• A Declaratory Judgment that at the commencement of this action Defendant was in violation of the specific requirements of Title III of the ADA described above, and the relevant implementing regulations of the ADA, in that Defendant took no action that was reasonably calculated to ensure that its Website is fully accessible to, and independently usable by, individuals with visual disabilities
• A permanent injunction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12188(a)(2), 28 CFR § 36.504(a), N.Y. Exec. Law § 296, et seq., and the laws of New York, which directs Defendant to take all steps necessary to bring its Website into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that its Website is fully accessible to, and independently usable by, blind individuals, and which further directs that the Court shall retain jurisdiction for a period to be determined to ensure that Defendant has adopted and is following an institutional policy that will in fact cause it to remain fully in compliance with the law—the specific injunctive relief requested by Plaintiff is described more fully in paragraph 11 above.
• Payment of actual, statutory, and punitive damages, as the Court deems proper
• Payment of costs of suit
• Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined by proof, including all applicable statutory damages and fines, to Plaintiff for violations of her civil rights under New York State Human Rights Law
• Payment of reasonable attorneys’ fees, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205 and 28 CFR § 36.505, including costs of monitoring Defendant’s compliance with the judgment (see Access Now, Inc. v. Lax World, LLC, No. 1:17-cv-10976-DJC (D. Mass. Apr. 17, 2018) (ECF 11) (“Plaintiffs, as the prevailing party, may file a fee petition before the Court surrenders jurisdiction. Pursuant to Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens’ Council for Clean Air, 478 U.S. 546, 559 (1986), supplemented, 483 U.S. 711 (1987), and Garrity v. Sununu, 752 F.2d 727, 738-39 (1st Cir. 1984), the fee petition may include costs to monitor Defendant’s compliance with the permanent injunction.”); see also Gniewkowski v. Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-01898-AJS (W.D. Pa. Jan. 11, 2018) (ECF 191) (same)
• Whatever other relief the Court deems just, equitable and appropriate
• An Order retaining jurisdiction over this case until Defendant has complied with the Court’s Orders.