Dominguez v. Banana Republic, LLC

Background

Yovanny Dominguez sued Banana Republic, LLC, individually and on behalf of similarly situated people. He alleged that on October 26, 2019, he called Banana Republic’s customer service office to ask whether it sold Braille gift cards. An employee told him that it did not and did not offer him an alternative aid or service during the call. Dominguez later unsuccessfully tried to find an accessible Banana Republic gift card.

Dominguez asserted claims under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. He sought compensatory and punitive damages, a permanent injunction requiring Banana Republic to make its gift cards accessible, and attorneys’ fees. Banana Republic moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), for lack of standing, and 12(b)(6), for failure to state a claim.

Standing

The court first considered whether Dominguez had standing to seek an injunction. For an ADA claim seeking injunctive relief, the court said a plaintiff must allege a past ADA injury, facts supporting a reasonable inference that the discriminatory treatment will continue, and facts supporting a reasonable inference that the plaintiff intends to return to the location. The court found that Dominguez adequately alleged that he encountered the alleged barrier and that Banana Republic did not plan to begin selling Braille gift cards.

The court found the third requirement—an intent to return—missing. Dominguez alleged only generally that he had been a customer at Banana Republic stores and that stores were near his residence. The court held that these statements did not provide enough specific facts to plausibly show that he would return and be injured by Banana Republic’s failure to sell accessible gift cards. The court therefore held that Dominguez lacked standing to seek injunctive relief under the ADA.

The court stated that the New York State and New York City claims were governed by the same standing requirements and therefore failed along with the ADA claim. Alternatively, after dismissing the federal claims, the court said it would decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction—the court’s authority to hear related state-law claims—over the remaining claims.

ADA Merits

Alternatively, the court addressed whether the complaint stated an ADA claim and held that it would fail under Rule 12(b)(6).

First, the court held that Title III does not require a retailer to stock specialty goods for people with disabilities. In the court’s view, Title III requires equal access to the goods and services a business normally provides; it does not require the business to change its inventory to include specially designed goods. The court treated gift cards as goods that Banana Republic normally sells and relied on the ADA’s text and Department of Justice regulations stating that businesses need not alter their inventory to include accessible or special goods. The court therefore held that Banana Republic did not violate Title III merely by failing to sell Braille or otherwise accessible gift cards.

Second, the court rejected the theory that a gift card itself is a place of public accommodation. It reasoned that gift cards are not places and do not fit within the ADA’s categories of public accommodations. A gift card may be used to purchase goods from a retailer, but it is not a space where those purchases are made.

Third, the court rejected the claim that Banana Republic denied Dominguez access to an auxiliary aid or service. The ADA requires effective communication but generally allows the public accommodation to choose among effective aids and services. The court said Dominguez asked only whether Banana Republic sold Braille gift cards. He did not ask what other aids or services were available. The court found his allegation, made only on information and belief, that Banana Republic offered no aids or services for gift cards too conclusory to support a claim.

Disposition

Judge Woods granted Banana Republic’s motion to dismiss. The order did not enter a final judgment immediately. Instead, it gave Dominguez fifteen days to file a second amended complaint alleging additional facts about his interactions with Banana Republic. The court stated that if he did not amend within that period, it would enter a final judgment of dismissal and direct the Clerk of Court to close the case. The Clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion at docket number 24.