1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

ARANTZA ESPINOZA, CASE NO.

 Plaintiff,

vs.

TIFFANY & COMPANY,

A Foreign for Profit Corporation 

D/B/A TIFFANY & CO.

Defendant.

____________________________________________/

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND

 Plaintiff, ARANTZA ESPINOZA, through undersigned counsel, sues Defendant, 

TIFFANY & COMPANY, a foreign corporation d/b/a TIFFANY & CO. (hereinafter referred to 

as “TIFFANY & CO.”), for declaratory and injunctive relief, and damages, and alleges as follows:

1) This action is brought under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), that 

is codified in 42 U.S.C. §§12181-12189. 

2) This action is also brought pursuant to 28 C.F.R. Part 36.

3) This Court has jurisdiction over this case based on federal question jurisdiction, as provided 

in 28 U.S.C. §1331 and the provisions of the ADA.

4) Furthermore, because this Court has jurisdiction over the ADA claim, the Court has 

supplementary jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s common law tort claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367.

5) Plaintiff is sui juris, and she is disabled as defined by the ADA and ADA Amendments Act 

of 2008, 42 U.S.C. §12101 (“ADAAA”).

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 1 of 19
2

6) Defendant, TIFFANY & CO., is a foreign limited liability company authorized to do 

business and doing business in the State of Florida.

7) Defendant, TIFFANY & CO., is a company that sells men and women jewelry, engagement 

rings, watches, accessories, fragrance and home décor. There is a retail location in Miami-Dade 

County. 

8) Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.

9) Plaintiff desires to prevent discrimination and demands equal access to Defendant’s 

internet website to purchase a necklace and a key ring.

10) Plaintiff also seeks declaratory and injunctive relief for trespass against the Plaintiff’s 

computer. The computer is Plaintiff’s personal property, and a claim for trespass attached to same.

11) The Defendant is also liable for compensatory damages to Plaintiff as a result of the 

trespass to Plaintiff’s personal property.

12) The remedies provided under common law for trespass are not exclusive, and same may 

be sought in connection with suits brought under the ADA.

13) Venue is proper in the Southern District of Florida, Miami-Dade Division, since all events, 

actions, injuries, and damages complained of herein occurred in the Southern District of Florida.

14) Furthermore, Plaintiff is a resident of Miami-Dade County which falls within the Miami 

Division of the Southern District of Florida.

15) At all relevant times, Plaintiff is and was visually impaired and has Leber Congenital 

Amaurosis since birth that substantially impairs Plaintiff’s vision.

16) Plaintiff’s visual impairment interferes with her day-to-day activities and causes limitations 

in visualizing their environment. As such, Plaintiff is a member of a protected class under the 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 2 of 19
3

ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12102(1) - (2), the regulations implementing the ADA set forth at 28 CFR §§ 

36.101, et seq., and in 42 U.S.C. 3602, §802(h). 

17) Plaintiff regularly uses the computer, but she needs the assistance of special software for 

visually impaired persons. The software that she uses is screen reader software that is readily 

available commercially.

18) Defendant is a private entity which owns and operates retail locations. The stores are open 

to the public, and each of Defendant’s locations is defined as a “public accommodation" within 

the meaning of Title III of the ADA because Defendant is a private entity which owns and/or 

operates “[A] bakery, grocery store, clothing store, hardware store, shopping center, or other sales 

or rental establishment,” per 42 U.S.C. §12181(7)(E) and 28 C.F.R. §36.104(2).

19) Defendant’s website is a place of public accommodation per 42 U.S.C. Section 

12181(7)(E) because it’s an extension of Defendant’s brick and mortar stores. The public is able 

to, among other things, view the products available at defendant’s locations, purchase jewelry, 

engagement rings, watches, accessories fragrance and home décor through defendant’s website, 

subscribe to Defendant’s newsletter, create an account and register to track orders, create a wish 

list, and learn the story behind Defendant’s brand, and book an appointment. 

20) Since the Defendant’s website is a public accommodation, it must comply with the 

requirements of the ADA. The website cannot discriminate against individuals with disabilities. 

21) Plaintiff is a customer of Defendant who is and was interested in purchasing a necklace 

and a key ring through Defendant’s website and at Defendant’s stores and visiting Defendant’s 

brick and mortar locations. 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 3 of 19
4

22) Plaintiff is not able to visit the physical locations without the assistance of a family member 

or caretaker, so the ability to purchase merchandise on Defendant’s website for delivery to her 

home is important to her as an alternative when she is not able to visit the Defendant’s stores.

23) The website also services Defendant’s physical stores by providing information on its 

brand, product care and repair, and other information that Defendant is interested in 

communicating to its customers about its physical locations.

24) Since the website allows the public the ability to view the products available at defendant’s 

locations, purchase jewelry, engagement rings, watches, accessories fragrance and home décor, 

through defendant’s website, subscribe to Defendant’s newsletter, create an account and register 

to track orders, create a wish list, and learn the story behind Defendant’s brand, and book an 

appointment, the website is an extension of, and gateway to, Defendant’s physical stores. By this 

nexus, the website is characterized as an intangible service, privilege and advantage provided by 

a place of public accommodation as defined under the ADA, and thus an extension of the services, 

privileges and advantages made available to the general public by Defendant through its retail 

brick and mortar stores.

25) Because the public can view and purchase Defendant’s merchandise that is also offered for 

sale by Defendant at its physical stores, subscribe to Defendant’s newsletter, create an account and 

register to track orders, create a wish list, and learn the story behind Defendant’s brand, and book 

an appointment, the website is an extension of and gateway to the physical stores, which are places 

of public accommodation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12181(7)(E). As such, the website, as an 

intangible service, privilege and advantage of Defendant’s brick and mortar locations, must be 

fully accessible and in compliance with the ADA, must not discriminate against individuals with 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 4 of 19
5

disabilities, and must not deny full and equal enjoyment of the same services, privileges and 

advantages afforded to the general public both online and at the physical locations.

26) At all times material hereto, Defendant was and still is an organization owning and 

operating the website located at https://www.tiffany.com/ Since the website is open through the 

internet to the public as an extension of the retail stores, by this nexus the website is an intangible 

service, privilege and advantage of Defendant’s brick and mortar locations, and Defendant has 

subjected itself and the associated website it created and maintains to the requirements of the ADA.

27) Plaintiff is and/or has been a customer who is interested in patronizing, and intends to 

patronize, Defendant’s physical stores, and purchase Defendant’s merchandise, sign up for 

Defendant’s newsletter and create an account through the website and at Defendant’s physical 

stores.

28) The opportunity to shop Defendant’s merchandise from her home is an important 

accommodation for Plaintiff because traveling outside of the home as a visually disabled individual 

is often a difficult, hazardous, frustrating, confusing, and frightening experience. Defendant has 

not provided its business information in any other digital format that is accessible for use by blind 

and visually disabled individuals using screen reader software.

29) Like most consumers, Plaintiff accesses numerous websites at a time to compare 

merchandise and prices. Plaintiff may look at several dozens of sites to compare features and 

prices.

30) During the months of September and October, 2022, Plaintiff attempted on several 

occasions to utilize the website to browse through the merchandise to educate herself as to the 

merchandise and with the intent to make a purchase through the website or at one of Defendant’s 

physical stores.

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 5 of 19
6

31) Places of public accommodation are not just brick-and-mortar structures. The United 

States Department of Justice and the binding case law increasingly recognize that private entities 

are providing goods and services to the public through websites that operate as places of public 

accommodation under Title III.

32) Defendant is required to make reasonable accommodations to its websites for individuals 

with disabilities to allow them to participate in web-based promotions and obtain goods or services 

via the Internet just as sighted persons are able to do.

33) Plaintiff utilized Chrome Vox (“Screen Reader Software”) to attempt to purchase a 

necklace and a key ring on Defendant’s website. However, the Plaintiff was not able to freely and 

fully use Defendant’s website because it contains access barriers that make it inaccessible to 

persons with disabilities, and for which there is no reasonable accommodation for the Plaintiff.

34) A person who can see can enjoy the benefits and privileges provided by Defendant’s 

website that include, but are not limited to viewing the products available at defendant’s locations, 

purchasing jewelry, engagement rings, watches, accessories fragrance and home décor, through 

defendant’s website, subscribe to Defendant’s newsletter, create an account and register to track 

orders, create a wish list, and learn the story behind Defendant’s brand, and book an appointment.

35) A person who cannot see, like the Plaintiff in this case, cannot go to Defendant’s website 

and avail themselves of the same privileges. Thus, the Plaintiff has suffered discrimination due to 

Defendant’s failure to provide a reasonable accommodation for Plaintiff’s disability.

36) The Department of Justice has provided useful guidance regarding website accessibility 

under the ADA, and the binding and persuasive case law in this district has applied the Web 

Content Accessibility Guidelines (“WCAG”) 2.0 or 2.1 to determine accessibility. 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 6 of 19
7

37) Defendant’s website does in fact fail the following WCAG 2.0-AA Compliance standards 

and it does not provide sufficient alternatives to serve the equivalent purpose:

System settings while doing the review:

Operating system: Windows 10

Browser: Google Chrome v. 105.0.5195.127

Screen Reader: NVDA v. 2022.3

List of a few of the violations encountered:

Violation: The complimentary offer at the top of the page is not explained in an audible 

format and the button that closes it has no audible label that explains what it does.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/p8bd61lw0i9re76/2022_10_09_175139_01.mp4?dl=0

Violation: The top right section of the main navigation has a series of links that are 

labeled blank or clickable landmark banner button. These labels do not provide indicate 

to the user what they are for.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cwq68hv23jeqnoo/2022_10_09_175139_02.mp4?dl=0

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 7 of 19
8

Violation: There is no skip to content mechanism provided. This forces the user to cycle 

though the main navigation and secondary navigation options before moving on to the 

main content.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2kfoqt3xvsjaqxp/2022_10_09_175139_03.mp4?dl=0

Violation: Shortly after a product page loads there's a pop up modal that comes into 

focus. This modal interrupts the expected sequence and focus order for the user. In 

addition to that, once the user closes the modal the focus is shifted to the links at the 

bottom of the page, again not the expected sequence and focus order.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 2.4.3 Focus Order (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jyuvj5k93qprsei/2022_10_09_175139_04.mp4?dl=0

Violation: The plus button in the quantity section within the product description is not 

given an audible label that provides context. The minus button has no label at all.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8z8lviqczx2lszv/2022_10_09_175139_05.mp4?dl=0

Violation: When an item is added to the bag, there’s no audible indication that the 

checkout modal is in focus. Furthermore, the modal disappears after a few seconds and 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 8 of 19
9

the focus shifts to the content directly below the Add to Bag button. The user then must 

go through a long carousel of You May Also Like items, The Tiffany Experience and the 

footer links before going back to the main menu and being able to access the link for 

checking out.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 2.4.3 Focus Order (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/n54o7h90mze0sr9/2022_10_09_175139_06.mp4?dl=0

Violation: When an input error is automatically detected with gift card number and or gift 

card pin, the error is not described to the user in an audible way. 

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 3.3.1 Error Identification (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fbvo26iu1us2qhf/2022_10_09_175139_08.mp4?dl=0

38) Furthermore, Defendant’s website does not contain accessibility assistance that would 

direct a visually impaired person like the Plaintiff to someone who she can contact for assistance, 

questions, or concerns.

39) Thus, Defendant has not provided full and equal enjoyment of the services, facilities, 

privileges, advantages, and accommodations provided by and through the website, in 

contravention of the ADA. 

40) On information and belief, Defendant is, and at all times has been, aware of the barriers to 

its website which prevent individuals with disabilities who are visually impaired from 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 9 of 19
10

comprehending the information within same, and is also aware of the need to provide access to all 

persons who visit its site. 

41) Plaintiff has no plain, adequate, or complete remedy at law to redress the wrongs alleged 

in this Complaint, such that this suit for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief is her only 

means to secure adequate and complete redress from Defendant’s discriminatory practices in 

connection with use of its website.

42) Notice to Defendant is not required because of Defendant’s failure to cure the violations. 

43) Enforcement of Plaintiff’s rights under the ADA is right and just pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 

2201 and 2202.

44) Plaintiff has retained the undersigned attorneys to represent her in this case, and has agreed 

to pay them a reasonable fee for their services.

COUNT I – VIOLATION OF THE ADA

45) Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1 through 44 as if set forth fully herein.

46) Defendant owns and operates the https://www.tiffany.com/ website, and is a public 

accommodation subject to the ADA pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12181(7)(E).

47) Defendant’s website is inaccessible to persons with disabilities like the Plaintiff, who is 

visually impaired. Plaintiff was not able to enjoy full and equal access to the information and 

services that Defendant has made available to the public on its website, in violation of 42 U.S.C. 

§12101. et seq, and as prohibited by 42 U.S.C. §12182 et seq.

48) Defendant’s website is not in compliance with the ADA.

49) Defendant has made no reasonable accommodation for Plaintiff’s disability. 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 10 of 19
11

50) A cursory review of a portion of the Defendant’s website revealed that the website is not 

accessible to persons like the Plaintiff that are visually impaired as required by law and for which 

there is no sufficient alternative on Defendant’s website, including:

System settings while doing the review:

Operating system: Windows 10

Browser: Google Chrome v. 105.0.5195.127

Screen Reader: NVDA v. 2022.3

List of a few of the violations encountered:

Violation: The complimentary offer at the top of the page is not explained in an audible 

format and the button that closes it has no audible label that explains what it does.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/p8bd61lw0i9re76/2022_10_09_175139_01.mp4?dl=0

Violation: The top right section of the main navigation has a series of links that are 

labeled blank or clickable landmark banner button. These labels do not provide indicate 

to the user what they are for.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cwq68hv23jeqnoo/2022_10_09_175139_02.mp4?dl=0

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 11 of 19
12

Violation: There is no skip to content mechanism provided. This forces the user to cycle 

though the main navigation and secondary navigation options before moving on to the 

main content.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2kfoqt3xvsjaqxp/2022_10_09_175139_03.mp4?dl=0

Violation: Shortly after a product page loads there’s pop up modal that comes into focus. 

This modal interrupts the expected sequence and focus order for the user. In addition to 

that, once the user closes the modal the focus is shifted to the links at the bottom of the 

page, again not the expected sequence and focus order.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 2.4.3 Focus Order (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jyuvj5k93qprsei/2022_10_09_175139_04.mp4?dl=0

Violation: The plus button in the quantity section within the product description is not 

given an audible label that provides context. The minus button has no label at all.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8z8lviqczx2lszv/2022_10_09_175139_05.mp4?dl=0

Violation: When an item is added to the bag, there’s no audible indication that the 

checkout modal is in focus. Furthermore, the modal disappears after a few seconds and 

the focus shifts to the content directly below the Add to Bag button. The user then must 

go through a long carousel of You May Also Like items, The Tiffany Experience and the 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 12 of 19
13

footer links before going back to the main menu and being able to access the link for 

checking out.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 2.4.3 Focus Order (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/n54o7h90mze0sr9/2022_10_09_175139_06.mp4?dl=0

Violation: When an input error is automatically detected with gift card number and or gift 

card pin, the error is not described to the user in an audible way. 

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 3.3.1 Error Identification (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fbvo26iu1us2qhf/2022_10_09_175139_08.mp4?dl=0

51) Due to Defendant’s failure to provide an ADA compliant website, the Plaintiff has been 

injured since she has been denied full access to Defendant’s website.

52) As a result, Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12133 and 28 

C.F.R. §36.303 to correct the inaccessibility that leads to discrimination against visually impaired 

persons.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests entry of judgment in her favor and against Defendant for the 

following relief:

A. A declaration that Defendant’s website is in violation of the ADA;

B. An Order requiring Defendant, by a date certain, to update its website, and continue 

to monitor and update its website on an ongoing basis, to remove barriers in order that individuals 

with visual disabilities can access, and continue to access, the website and effectively communicate 

with the website to the full extent required by Title III of the ADA;

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 13 of 19
14

C. An Order requiring Defendant, by a date certain, to clearly display the universal 

disabled logo within its website, wherein the logo [1] would lead to a page which would state 

Defendant’s accessibility information, facts, policies, and accommodations. Such a clear display 

of the disabled logo is to ensure that individuals who are disabled are aware of the availability of 

the accessible features of the website;

D. An Order requiring Defendant, by a date certain, to provide ongoing support for web 

accessibility by implementing a website accessibility coordinator, a website application 

accessibility policy, and providing for website accessibility feedback to insure compliance thereto.

E. An Order directing Defendant, by a date certain to evaluate its policies, practices and 

procedures toward persons with disabilities, for such reasonable time to allow Defendant to 

undertake and complete corrective procedures to its website;

F. An Order directing Defendant, by a date certain, to establish a policy of web 

accessibility and accessibility features for its website to insure effective communication for 

individuals who are visually disabled;

G. An Order requiring, by a date certain, that any third-party vendors who participate on 

Defendant’s website to be fully accessible to the visually disabled;

H. An Order directing Defendant, by a date certain and at least once yearly thereafter, to 

provide mandatory web accessibility training to all employees who write or develop programs or 

code for, or who publish final content to, Defendant’s website on how to conform all web content 

and services with ADA accessibility requirements and applicable accessibility guidelines;

I. An Order directing Defendant, by a date certain and at least once every three months 

thereafter, to conduct automated accessibility tests of its website to identify any instances where 

the website is no longer in conformance with the accessibility requirements of the ADA and any 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 14 of 19
15

applicable accessibility guidelines, and further directing Defendant to send a copy of the twelve 

(12) quarterly reports to Plaintiff’s counsel for review.

J. An Order directing Defendant, by a date certain, to make publicly available and 

directly link from its website homepage, a statement of Defendant’s Accessibility Policy to ensure 

the persons with disabilities have full and equal enjoyment of its website and shall accompany the 

public policy statement with an accessible means of submitting accessibility questions and 

problems.

K. An award to Plaintiff of her reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to in 42 

U.S.C. §§12181-12189, and pursuant to such other laws and statutes that may apply, and further 

relief as the Court deems just and equitable. 

[1]

COUNT II – TRESPASS

53) Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1 through 44 as if set forth herein. 

54) Defendant’s website contains software analytics. Since Plaintiff has navigated 

Defendant’s website as stated herein, Plaintiff’s computer and the personal information and 

browsing history stored therein, has suffered a trespass by Defendant.

55) Plaintiff never consented to and was unaware that Defendant’s website was placing 

software on her computer. 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 15 of 19
16

56) Defendant committed common law trespass in violation of Florida law against Plaintiff 

because Plaintiff did not consent to the placement of tracking and information securing software 

on her personal computer, which was done without her knowledge and consent.

57) Defendant’s trespass has damaged Plaintiff by affecting the condition and value of her 

computer. 

58) On its website, Defendant has an internet privacy policy section that can only be accessed 

by clicking a barely visible section at the bottom of the page called “Cookies Policy”, providing 

that they use cookies and similar technologies to collect a consumer’s information and they obtain 

non-public information from their users for their own advertising and marketing purposes by 

placing software on its website that collects a website user’s preferences and internet browsing 

habits as follows:

Cookies Policy

Tiffany & Co. cookie policy

Cookies are automated means through which we collect information on our website and 

by which we can sometimes track information about your use of our website. We use 

cookies to optimize your user experience, the functionality of our website and our service 

to you. When you visit our site, our web server sends a cookie to your computer, which 

allows us to recognize your computer to perform a variety of functions.

By proceeding to navigate beyond this page, you consent to our cookie settings and agree 

that you understand this Cookies Policy and our Privacy Notice. Please note that you may 

restrict cookies by changing your browser settings, but that such restrictions will 

potentially degrade and impact your user experience and functionality of our website.

What purposes do cookies serve?

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 16 of 19
17

1. Cookies Support Basic Website Functionality: Some cookies are functional and 

necessary cookies that support essential features of our website, such as storing your 

shopping cart selections while you continue to shop and navigate to different pages of our 

website.

2. Cookies Can Help Improve the Quality of Our Website and Services: Cookies collect 

information (including sometimes IP address) to assess how you use our website, so that 

we can improve the navigability of our site and provide you with better service. We use 

this information to:

Provide aggregate and anonymous statistics on how our site is used;

See how effective our advertisements are by identifying where you click and from which 

website you arrived;

Provide feedback to carefully selected third party partners that one of our visitors also 

visited their website;

Help us improve the site by capturing errors in your browsing experience.

Provide you with improved site functionality by allowing access to additional services or 

restoring your shopping bag if you wish to return on a subsequent browsing session.

3. Cookies May Share Information With Our Carefully Chosen Third-Party Partners: 

Third-party cookies may share information with partners to provide services on our site. 

The information shared is only to be used to provide the service or function (such as 

social media “like” and “share” buttons). Certain third-party cookies can be used to offer 

a customized user experience, by providing you with interest-based services (see 

“Interest-Based Advertising”) both on this site and on some other websites as well. Some 

of these customized browsing experiences may be linked to services provided by third 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 17 of 19
18

parties which provide these services to recognize that you have visited our site. This 

information is used to inform you of Tiffany products and services which may be of 

interest to you. These cookies may also link to social media networks such as Facebook 

or provide advertising agencies with information about your visit so that they can present 

you with advertisements for Tiffany products and services which may be of interest to 

you.

Managing your cookie preferences

To manage the third-party cookies served on our site, please visit the relevant websites 

listed here:

Google Analytics: https://policies.google.com/privacy

Adobe Analytics: http://www.adobe.com/privacy/analytics.html#1

Sizmek: http://www.sizmek.com/about-us/privacy

To manage all cookies on our site, including those that are served by us, you can change 

your browser settings. For additional information on how to manage all cookies please 

visit http://www.allaboutcookies.org/. Please note that disabling, blocking or deleting 

cookies in your browser settings may impact your ability to fully use our website.

Please see our Privacy Notice for further details about what information we collect and 

how we use any personal information you give us, however not all information captured 

by using cookies will identify you.

59) Due to Plaintiff’s disability, she could not understand Defendant’s website and she could 

not give informed consent to Defendant’s installation of data and information tracking software 

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 18 of 19
19

on her computer. Defendant also could not give informed consent to Defendant’s collection of her 

browsing history and the placement of analytics on her computer.

60) Thus, Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law to redress Defendant’s knowing and reckless 

disregard for Plaintiff’s right to exclude others from her computer and determine which programs 

should be installed and operated on her computer.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for Plaintiff’s damages, interest, 

costs, and such further relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

Request for Jury Trial

61) Plaintiff requests a jury trial.

Submitted by:

Mendez Law Offices, PLLC

Attorneys for Plaintiff

P.O. BOX 228630

Miami, Florida 33172

Telephone: 305.264.9090

Facsimile: 1-305.809.8474

Email:info@mendezlawoffices.com

By: /s/ 

DIEGO GERMAN MENDEZ, ESQ.

FL BAR NO.: 52748

Adams & Associates, P.A.

Attorneys for Plaintiff

6500 Cowpen Road, Suite 101

Miami Lakes, FL 33014

Telephone: 786-290-1963

Facsimile: 305-824-3868

Email: radamslaw@bellsouth.net

By: /s/ 

RICHARD J. ADAMS, ESQ.

FL BAR NO.: 770434

Case 1:22-cv-23360-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2022 Page 19 of 19