1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

Case No. 

DEBORAH LAUFER, individually, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

OM MAA OM LLC, a Florida Limited 

Liability Company, d/b/a ECONOMY 

INN; SOMABHAI L. ETAL DESAI, 

SHARDABEN S. DESAI, VAISHALI 

S. DESAI, and RITABEN PATEL, 

 Defendants. 

___________________________________/ 

COMPLAINT 

(Injunctive Relief Demanded) 

 Plaintiff, DEBORAH LAUFER, individually, on her behalf and on behalf of all other 

individuals similarly situated (sometimes referred to as “Plaintiff”), hereby sues the Defendants, OM 

MAA OM LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, d/b/a ECONOMY INN; SOMABHAI L. 

ETAL DESAI, SHARDABEN S. DESAI, VAISHALI S. DESAI, and RITABEN PATEL 

(sometimes referred to as “Defendants”), for Injunctive Relief, and attorney’s fees, litigation 

expenses, and costs pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. 

(“ADA”). 

 1. Plaintiff is a resident of Alachua County, Florida, is sui juris, and qualifies as an 

individual with disabilities as defined by the ADA. Plaintiff is unable to engage in the major life 

activity of walking more than a few steps without assistive devices. Instead, Plaintiff is bound to 

ambulate in a wheelchair or with a cane or other support and has limited use of her hands. She is 

unable to tightly grasp, twist the wrist, and pinch to operate. Plaintiff is also vision impaired. When 

Case 1:19-cv-00206-AW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 10/17/19 Page 1 of 8
2 

ambulating beyond the comfort of her own home, Plaintiff must primarily rely on a wheelchair. 

Plaintiff requires accessible handicap parking spaces located closest to the entrances of a facility. 

The handicap and access aisles must be of sufficient width so that she can embark and disembark 

from a ramp into her vehicle. Routes connecting the handicap spaces and all features, goods and 

services of a facility must be level, properly sloped, sufficiently wide and without cracks, holes or 

other hazards that can pose a danger of tipping, catching wheels or falling. These areas must be free 

of obstructions or unsecured carpeting that make passage either more difficult or impossible. 

Amenities must be sufficiently lowered so that Plaintiff can reach them. She has difficulty operating 

door knobs, sink faucets, or other operating mechanisms that require tight grasping, twisting of the 

wrist or pinching. She is hesitant to use sinks that have unwrapped pipes, as such pose a danger of 

scraping or burning her legs. Sinks must be at the proper height so that she can put her legs 

underneath to wash her hands. She requires grab bars both behind and beside a commode so that she 

can safely transfer and she has difficulty reaching the flush control if it is on the wrong side. She has 

difficulty getting through doorways if they lack the proper clearance. 

 2. Plaintiff is an advocate of the rights of similarly situated disabled persons and is a 

"tester" for the purpose of asserting her civil rights and monitoring, ensuring, and determining 

whether places of public accommodation and their websites are in compliance with the ADA. 

 3. Defendants own, lease, lease to, or operate a place of public accommodation as 

defined by the ADA and the regulations implementing the ADA, 28 CFR 36.201(a) and 36.104. The 

place of public accommodation that the Defendants own, lease, lease to, or operate is a place of 

lodging known as Economy Inn, located at 94 San Marco Ave., St. Augustine, Florida, and is located 

in the County of St. Johns (hereinafter "Property"). 

Case 1:19-cv-00206-AW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 10/17/19 Page 2 of 8
3 

 4. Venue is properly located in the Northern District of Florida because the injury 

occurred in this district. 

 5. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343, this Court has been given original 

jurisdiction over actions which arise from the Defendant’s violations of Title III of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. See also 28 U.S.C. § 2201 and § 2202. 

 6. As the owner, lessor, lessee, or operator of the subject place of lodging, Defendants 

are required to comply with the ADA. As such, Defendants are required to ensure that their place 

of lodging is in compliance with the standards applicable to places of public accommodation, as set 

forth in the regulations promulgated by the Department of Justice. Said regulations are set forth in 

the Code of Federal Regulations, the Americans with Disabilities Act Architectural Guidelines 

("ADAAGs"), and the 2010 ADA Standards, incorporated by reference into the ADA. These 

regulations impose requirements pertaining to places of public accommodation, including places of 

lodging, to ensure that they are accessible to disabled individuals. 

 7. More specifically, 28 C.F.R. Section 36.302(e)(1) imposes the following 

requirement: 

Reservations made by places of lodging. A public accommodation that owns, leases (or 

leases to), or operates a place of lodging shall, with respect to reservations made by any 

means, including by telephone, in-person, or through a third party - 

(i) Modify its policies, practices, or procedures to ensure that individuals with 

disabilities can make reservations for accessible guest rooms during the same hours 

and in the same manner as individuals who do not need accessible rooms; 

(ii) Identify and describe accessible features in the hotels and guest rooms offered 

through its reservations service in enough detail to reasonably permit individuals with 

disabilities to assess independently whether a given hotel or guest room meets his or 

her accessibility needs; 

(iii) Ensure that accessible guest rooms are held for use by individuals with 

disabilities until all other guest rooms of that type have been rented and the accessible 

room requested is the only remaining room of that type; 

(iv) Reserve, upon request, accessible guest rooms or specific types of guest rooms 

and ensure that the guest rooms requested are blocked and removed from all 

reservations systems; and 

Case 1:19-cv-00206-AW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 10/17/19 Page 3 of 8
4 

(v) Guarantee that the specific accessible guest room reserved through its reservations 

service is held for the reserving customer, regardless of whether a specific room is 

held in response to reservations made by others. 

These regulations became effective March 15, 2012. 

 8. Defendants, either themselves or by and through a third party, implemented, operate, 

control and/or maintain websites for the Property which contain an online reservations system. This 

term also includes all other websites owned and operated by Defendant or by third parties to book 

or reserve guest accommodations at the hotel. These websites are located at: 

http://www.economyinnstaugustinefl.us/; https://www.expedia.com/St-Augustine-HotelsEconomy-Inn.h11476563.Hotel-Information; https://www.orbitz.com/St-Augustine-HotelsEconomy-Inn.h11476563.HotelInformation?chkin=10%2F14%2F2019&chkout=10%2F15%2F2019; 

https://www.agoda.com/economy-inn-historic-district/hotel/st-augustine-fl-us.html?cid=-218; 

https://www.hotels.com/ho530382/?q-check-out=2019-10-15&FPQ=2&q-check-in=2019-10-14; 

https://www.priceline.com/relax/at/64016504/from/20191014/to/20191015/rooms/1/?preferredhote

lids=64016504; and https://www.booking.com/hotel/us/comfort-lodge-amp-suites-historic.html. 

The purpose of these websites is so that members of the public may reserve guest accommodations 

and review information pertaining to the goods, services, features, facilities, benefits, advantages, 

and accommodations of the Property. As such, these websites are subject to the requirements of 28 

C.F.R. Section 36.302(e). 

 9. Prior to the commencement of this lawsuit, Plaintiff visited the websites on 

September 25, 2019 for the purpose of reviewing and assessing the accessible features at the Property 

and to ascertain whether they meet the requirements of 28 C.F.R. Section 36.302(e) and her 

accessibility needs. However, Plaintiff was unable to do so because Defendants failed to comply 

Case 1:19-cv-00206-AW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 10/17/19 Page 4 of 8
5 

with the requirements set forth in 28 C.F.R. Section 36.302(e). As a result, Plaintiff was deprived 

the same goods, services, features, facilities, benefits, advantages, and accommodations of the 

Property available to the general public. Specifically, reviewed several dates for booking rooms and 

found no reference to any accessible rooms. There was no option to book an accessible room. No 

information was given as to whether or where it offers compliant/accessible roll-in showers, tubs, 

built in seating, commodes, grab bars, sinks, wrapped pipes, sink and door hardware, properly 

located amenities, sufficient maneuvering spaces, compliant doors, furniture, controls and operating 

mechanisms. The website does not contain any information as to whether all goods, facilities and 

services at the property are connected by a compliant accessible route, nor does the website contain 

any information as to the accessibility of routes connecting all the features of the hotel, the 

transaction counter, parking, and common area restrooms. The website does not give any 

information as to whether accessible rooms are on the ground floor or if an elevator is provided 

within an accessible route. Review of all the pages on the hotel websites, including third party 

booking sites, showed that while the hotel claims to have free self-parking, vending machine, and 

that there is no information as to whether any or all of these hotel features are accessible. 

 10. In the near future, Plaintiff intends to revisit Defendants’ websites and/or online 

reservations system in order to test them for compliance with 28 C.F.R. Section 36.302(e) and/or to 

utilize the websites to reserve a guest room and otherwise avail herself of the goods, services, 

features, facilities, benefits, advantages, and accommodations of the Property. 

 11. Plaintiff is continuously aware that the subject websites remain non-compliant and 

that it would be a futile gesture to revisit the websites as long as those violations exist unless she is 

willing to suffer additional discrimination. 

Case 1:19-cv-00206-AW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 10/17/19 Page 5 of 8
6 

 12. The violations present at Defendants’ websites infringe Plaintiff's right to travel free 

of discrimination and deprive her of the information required to make meaningful choices for travel. 

Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, frustration and humiliation as the result of the 

discriminatory conditions present at Defendants’ website. By continuing to operate the websites with 

discriminatory conditions, Defendants contribute to Plaintiff's sense of isolation and segregation and 

deprive Plaintiff the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges and/or 

accommodations available to the general public. By encountering the discriminatory conditions at 

Defendants’ websites, and knowing that it would be a futile gesture to return to the websites unless 

she is willing to endure additional discrimination, Plaintiff is deprived of the same advantages, 

privileges, goods, services and benefits readily available to the general public. By maintaining a 

websites with violations, Defendants deprive Plaintiff the equality of opportunity offered to the 

general public. Defendants’ online reservations system serves as a gateway to its hotel. Because this 

online reservations system discriminates against Plaintiff, it is thereby more difficult to book a room 

at the hotel or make an informed decision as to whether the facilities at the hotel are accessible. 

 13. Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer direct and indirect injury as a result 

of the Defendants’ discrimination until the Defendants are compelled to modify its websites to 

comply with the requirements of the ADA and to continually monitor and ensure that the subject 

websites remain in compliance. 

 14. Plaintiff has a realistic, credible, existing and continuing threat of discrimination from 

the Defendants’ non-compliance with the ADA with respect to these websites. Plaintiff has 

reasonable grounds to believe that she will continue to be subjected to discrimination in violation of 

the ADA by the Defendants. 

Case 1:19-cv-00206-AW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 10/17/19 Page 6 of 8
7 

 15. The Defendants have discriminated against the Plaintiff by denying her access to, and 

full and equal enjoyment of, the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or 

accommodations of the subject websites. 

 16. The Plaintiff and all others similarly situated will continue to suffer such 

discrimination, injury and damage without the immediate relief provided by the ADA as requested 

herein. 

 17. Defendants have discriminated against the Plaintiff by denying her access to full and 

equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations of 

its place of public accommodation or commercial facility in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. 

and 28 CFR 36.302(e). Furthermore, the Defendants continue to discriminate against the Plaintiff, 

and all those similarly situated by failing to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices or 

procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford all offered goods, services, facilities, 

privileges, advantages or accommodations to individuals with disabilities; and by failing to take such 

efforts that may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied 

services, segregated or otherwise treated differently than other individuals because of the absence of 

auxiliary aids and services. 

 18. Plaintiff is without adequate remedy at law and is suffering irreparable harm. 

Plaintiff has retained the undersigned counsel and is entitled to recover attorney’s fees, costs and 

litigation expenses from the Defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205 and 28 CFR 36.505. 

 19. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12188, this Court is provided with authority to grant Plaintiff 

Injunctive Relief, including an order to require the Defendants to alter the subject websites to make 

them readily accessible and useable to the Plaintiff and all other persons with disabilities as defined 

Case 1:19-cv-00206-AW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 10/17/19 Page 7 of 8
8 

by the ADA and 28 C.F.R. Section 36.302(e); or by closing the websites until such time as the 

Defendants cure their violations of the ADA. 

 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests: 

a. The Court issue a Declaratory Judgment that determines that the Defendants 

at the commencement of the subject lawsuit are in violation of Title III of the 

Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. and 28 C.F.R. Section 

36.302(e). 

b. Injunctive relief against the Defendants including an order to revise its 

websites to comply with 28 C.F.R. Section 36.302(e) and to implement a policy to 

monitor and maintain the websites to ensure that they remain in compliance with said 

requirement. 

c. An award of attorney’s fees, costs and litigation expenses pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 12205. 

d. Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper, and/or is allowable under 

Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 

 Respectfully Submitted, 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

 Kathy L. Houston, Esq., Of Counsel 

 THOMAS B. BACON, P.A. 

 15321 S. Dixie Highway, Suite 205 

 Miami, FL 33157 

 Tel: (305) 420-6609 

 Fax: (786) 441-4416 

 Email: courtdocs@houstonlawfl.com

 By: /s/ Kathy L Houston_________ 

 Kathy L. Houston, Esq. 

       Florida Bar No: 56042 

Case 1:19-cv-00206-AW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 10/17/19 Page 8 of 8