Skip to main content
Accessibility.com, LLC

JAHODA v. MIZUNO USA, INC.

Filed March 12, 2019

Plaintiff

  • Name: Robert Jahoda
  • Filing date: March 12, 2019
  • State of filing: Pennsylvania

Defendant

  • Name: Mizuno USA, Inc.
  • Website: www.mizunousa.com
  • Industry: Consumer Goods
  • Summary: Mizuno USA, Inc. is a global sporting goods company.

Case Summary

On March 12, 2019, Robert Jahoda filed a Complaint in Pennsylvania Federal court against Mizuno USA, Inc.. Plaintiff Robert Jahoda alleges that www.mizunousa.com is not accessible.

Case Details

Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

  • The Website and Apps do not provide a text equivalent for non-text elements
  • The Website and Apps use visual cues to convey content and other information to sighted users
  • The Website and Apps use color as the only means of conveying information, indicating an action, prompting a response, or distinguishing a visual element
  • The foreground and background color combinations of the Website and Apps provide insufficient contrast
  • Some functionality is not operable through a keyboard interface
  • The Website and Apps prevent screen reader users who navigate sequentially through content from accessing primary content directly
  • Links and buttons on the Website and Apps do not describe their purpose
  • The Website and Apps fail to sufficiently describe the purpose of all heading labels
  • Elements on the Website and Apps do not have complete start and end tags, are not nested according to their specifications, and may contain duplicate attributes
  • The Website and Apps include user interface components, such as form elements and links, for which the name and role cannot be determined programmatically

Plaintiff asserts the following cause(s) of action in its Complaint:

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

Plaintiff seeks the following relief by way of its Complaint:

  • 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 Websites are fully accessible to, and independently usable by, individuals with visual disabilities
  • A permanent injunction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12188(a)(2) and 28 CFR § 36.504(a) which directs Defendant to take all steps necessary to bring its Websites into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that its Websites are 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 Plaintiffs is described more fully in paragraph 12 above
  • Payment of actual, statutory, and other damages, as the Court deems proper
  • Payment of costs of suit
  • 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 Gniewkowski v. Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-01898-AJS (W.D. Pa. Jan. 11, 2018) (ECF 191); see also Access Now, Inc. v. Lax World, LLC, No. 1:17-cv-10976-DJC (D. Mass. Apr. 17, 2018) (ECF 11)
  • 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

Consumer GoodsPennsylvania