Johnson v. An Khang Mi Gia

Background

Scott Johnson sued An Khang Mi Gia, identified in the opinion as a California corporation, under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. Johnson alleged that, during a November 2020 visit, the restaurant lacked wheelchair-accessible dining surfaces and that its outdoor dining surfaces did not provide enough knee clearance. He sought an injunction, statutory damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs.

The defendant was served through Sa Le Thai, whom the record identified as an authorized agent, on March 18, 2021. The defendant never answered or otherwise appeared. The court entered default on April 23, 2021, and Johnson later moved for default judgment. The defendant received notice of that motion but did not respond.

Jurisdiction and Service

The court determined that it had federal-question jurisdiction over the ADA claim and supplemental jurisdiction over the related Unruh Act claim. It also found that service was proper and that it had personal jurisdiction over the defendant.

Default Judgment

Applying the seven factors used by courts in the Ninth Circuit to evaluate default judgment, the court concluded that default judgment was warranted. The court accepted the complaint’s liability-related factual allegations as true because the defendant had not contested them, while noting that damages allegations are not automatically treated as true.

The court found that Johnson adequately alleged each required part of his ADA claim: he had a disability, the defendant owned or operated a restaurant open to the public, and he was denied access because the restaurant lacked accessible dining surfaces. Johnson also plausibly alleged that removing the barriers would be easily achievable without much difficulty or expense. Because Johnson met his initial burden on that issue and the defendant did not respond, the defendant failed to establish the defense that removing the barriers was not readily achievable.

The court also concluded that the alleged ADA violation supported an Unruh Act claim because, under the authority cited in the opinion, an ADA violation necessarily violates that Act.

Relief

The court granted injunctive relief requiring the restaurant’s dining surfaces to comply with the 2010 ADA Accessibility Guidelines no later than six months after service of the injunction. Johnson was directed to submit a revised proposed judgment and injunction within seven days.

The court awarded Johnson $4,000 in statutory damages under the Unruh Act. It also awarded $2,045 in attorneys’ fees and costs. The award included $1,210 in attorneys’ fees and $835 in costs.

For the fee calculation, the court reduced the requested hourly rates to $475 for Mark Potter, $250 for Faythe Gutierrez, and $100 for legal assistants, including Marcus Handy. It approved 6.1 hours of work. The court granted the requested $835 in costs, consisting of service costs, filing fees, and investigation costs.

Disposition

Judge Beth Labson Freeman granted Johnson’s motion for default judgment, awarded $4,000 in statutory damages, awarded $2,045 in attorneys’ fees and costs, and ordered the accessibility changes described above.