1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.

RENZO BARBERI,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ARC GROCERY, INC., a Florida Profit 

Corporation and GARDEN PROPERTY 

786, INC., a Florida Profit Corporation,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, RENZO BARBERI (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), through the undersigned counsel, hereby 

files this complaint and sues ARC GROCERY, INC. (“GROCERY”) and GARDEN 

PROPERTY 786, INC. (“GARDEN PROPERTY”) (hereinafter, collectively referred to as 

“Defendants”) for declaratory and injunctive relief; for discrimination based on disability; and 

for the resultant attorney's fees, expenses, and costs (including, but not limited to, court costs and 

expert fees), pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12181 et. seq., ("AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES 

ACT OF 1990," or "ADA") and alleges:

JURISDICTION 

1. This Court is vested with original jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§1331 and §1343 for Plaintiff’s claims arising under Title 42 U.S.C. §12181 et. seq., based on 

Defendants’ violations of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, (hereinafter 

referred to as the "ADA"). See also 28 U.S.C. §2201 and §2202.

VENUE

2. The venue of all events giving rise to this lawsuit is located in Broward County, Florida. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(B) and rule 3.1 of Local Rules of the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Florida, this is the designated court for this suit.

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 1 of 15
2

PARTIES

3. Plaintiff, RENZO BARBERI, is a resident of the State of Florida. At the time of 

Plaintiff’s visit to Family Grocery Store (“Subject Facility”), Plaintiff suffered from a “qualified 

disability” under the ADA, and required the use of a wheelchair for mobility. Specifically, 

Plaintiff suffers from paraplegia due to a severed T4 and T5, and is therefore confined to his 

wheelchair. Plaintiff personally visited Family Grocery Store, but was denied full and equal 

access, and full and equal enjoyment of the facilities, services, goods, and amenities within 

Family Grocery Store, which is the subject of this lawsuit. The Subject Facility is a grocery 

store, and Plaintiff wanted to purchase groceries but was unable to due to the discriminatory 

barriers enumerated in Paragraph 15 of this Complaint.

4. In the alternative, Plaintiff, RENZO BARBERI, is an advocate of the rights of similarly 

situated disabled persons and is a “tester” for the purpose of asserting his civil rights and 

monitoring, ensuring and determining whether places of public accommodation are in 

compliance with the ADA. 

5. Defendants, GROCERY and GARDEN PROPERTY, are authorized to conduct business 

and are in fact conducting business within the State of Florida. The Subject Facility is located at 

2950 SW 32nd Ave, Pembroke Park, FL 33023. Upon information and belief, GROCERY is the 

lessee and/or operator of the Real Property and therefore held accountable of the violations of the 

ADA in the Subject Facility which is the matter of this suit. Upon information and belief, 

GARDEN PROPERTY is the owner and lessor of the Real Property where the Subject Facility is 

located and therefore held accountable for the violations of the ADA in the Subject Facility 

which is the matter of this suit.

CLAIMS: VIOLATIONS OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

6. Plaintiff adopts and re-alleges the allegations stated in paragraphs 1 through 5 of this 

complaint, as are further explained herein.

7. On July 26, 1990, Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 

U.S.C. §12101 et. seq. Commercial enterprises were provided one and a half years from 

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 2 of 15
3

enactment of the statute to implement its requirements. The effective date of Title III of the ADA 

was January 26, 1992, or January 26, 1993 if Defendants had ten (10) or fewer employees and 

gross receipts of $500,000 or less. See 42 U.S.C. §12181; 28 C.F.R. §36.508(a).

8. As stated in 42 U.S.C. §12101(a) (1)-(3), (5) and (9), Congress found, among other 

things, that:

i. some 43,000,000 Americans have one or more physical or mental disability, and this 

number shall increase as the population continues to grow and age;

ii. historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities 

and, despite some improvements, such forms of discrimination against disabled 

individuals continue to be a pervasive social problem, requiring serious attention;

iii. discrimination against disabled individuals persists in such critical areas as 

employment, housing, public accommodations, transportation, communication, 

recreation, institutionalization, health services, voting and access to public services and 

public facilities;

iv. individuals with disabilities continually suffer forms of discrimination, including: 

outright intentional exclusion; the discriminatory effects of architectural, transportation, 

and communication barriers; failure to make modifications to existing facilities and 

practices; exclusionary qualification standards and criteria; segregation, and regulation 

to lesser services, programs, benefits, or other opportunities; and,

v. the continuing existence of unfair and unnecessary discrimination and prejudice denies 

people with disabilities the opportunity to compete on an equal basis and to pursue 

those opportunities for which this country is justifiably famous and costs the United 

States billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses resulting from dependency and nonproductivity.

9. As stated in 42 U.S.C. §12101(b)(1)(2) and (4), Congress explicitly stated that the 

purpose of the ADA was to:

i. provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of 

discrimination against individuals with disabilities;

ii. provide clear, strong, consistent, enforceable standards addressing discrimination 

against individuals with disabilities; and,

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 3 of 15
4

iii. invoke the sweep of congressional authority, including the power to enforce the 

fourteenth amendment and to regulate commerce, in order to address the major areas of 

discrimination faced on a daily basis by people with disabilities.

10. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12181(7), and 28 CFR §36.104, Title III, no individual may be 

discriminated against on the basis of disability with regards to the full and equal enjoyment of 

the goods, services, facilities, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any 

person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation. Family 

Grocery Store is a place of public accommodation by the fact it is an establishment that provides 

goods/services to the general public, and therefore, must comply with the ADA. The Subject 

Facility is open to the public, its operations affect commerce, and it is a grocery store. See 42 

U.S.C. Sec. 12181 (7) and 28 C.F.R. 36.104. Therefore, the Subject Facility is a public 

accommodation that must comply with the ADA.

11. The Defendants have discriminated, and continue to discriminate against the Plaintiff, 

and others who are similarly situated, by denying access to, and full and equal enjoyment of 

goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations at Family Grocery 

Store located at 2950 SW 32nd Ave, Pembroke Park, FL 33023, as prohibited by 42 U.S.C. 

§12182, and 42 U.S.C. §12101 et. seq.; and by failing to remove architectural barriers pursuant 

to 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(2)(A)(iv).

12. Plaintiff has visited the Subject Facility, and has been denied full, safe, and equal access 

to the facility and therefore suffered an injury in fact.

13. Plaintiff shall suffer a future injury as Plaintiff intends to return and enjoy the goods 

and/or services at the Subject Facility within the next six months. The Subject Facility is in close 

proximity to Plaintiff’s residence and is in an area frequently travelled by Plaintiff. Furthermore, 

Plaintiff will also return to monitor compliance with the ADA. However, Plaintiff is precluded 

from doing so by the Defendants' failure and refusal to provide people with disabilities with full 

and equal access to their facility. Therefore, Plaintiff continues to suffer from discrimination and 

injury due to the architectural barriers, which are in violation of the ADA.

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 4 of 15
5

14. Pursuant to the mandates of 42 U.S.C. §12134(a), on July 26, 1991, the Department of 

Justice, Office of the Attorney General, promulgated Federal Regulations to implement the 

requirements of the ADA. The ADA Accessibility guidelines (hereinafter referred to as 

“ADAAG”), 28 C.F.R. Part 36, may cause violators to obtain civil penalties of up to $55,000 for 

the first violation and $110,000 for any subsequent violation. 

15. The Defendants are in violation of 42 U.S.C. §12181 et. seq., and 28 C.F.R. 36.302 et. 

seq., and are discriminating against the Plaintiff with the following specific violations which 

Plaintiff personally encountered and/or has knowledge of:

a) The customer parking facilities in front of and alongside the market do not provide a 

compliant accessible parking space. 2012 ADA Standards 502.1 

b) The customer parking facility has seventeen (17) marked standard spaces and two (2) 

non-compliant accessible parking spaces. 2012 ADA Standards 208.2 

c) The parking facility does not have the minimum number of compliant accessible parking 

spaces required. One (1) accessible parking space with adjacent access aisle is required. 

2012 ADA Standards 208.2 

d) The parking facility does not provide directional and informational signage to a 

compliant accessible parking space. 2012 ADA Standards 216.5 

e) Existing facility does not provide a compliant accessible route to the convenience store 

main entrance from any site arrival point. 2012 ADA Standards 206.2, 208, 401.1 

f) There is no compliant access aisle attached to an accessible route serving any existing 

parking space which would allow safe entrance or exit of vehicle for accessible persons 

requiring mobility devices. 2012 ADA Standards 502.2 

g) There is currently no existing accessible route to help persons with disabilities enter the 

facility or safely maneuver through the parking area. At least one accessible route must 

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 5 of 15
6

be provided within the site from accessible parking spaces and accessible passenger 

loading zones; public streets and sidewalks; and public transportation stops to the 

accessible building or facility entrance they serve. 2012 ADA Standards 206.2.1 

h) The two non-compliant accessible parking spaces located in the north corner and the 

south corner of the parking lot must be entered in a north or south direction. There are 

standard spaces facing west in front of the store striped over the two accessible parking 

spaces rendering them useless. 2012 ADA Standards 502.6.1 

i) The north corner non-compliant accessible parking space has a ramp built out into the 

access aisle. 502.4 Floor or Ground Surfaces. Parking spaces and access aisles serving 

them must comply with 302. Access aisles must be at the same level as the parking 

spaces they serve. Changes in level are not permitted. 2012 ADA Standards 502.4 

j) The north corner non-compliant accessible parking space does not have the correct 

ground markings. Accessible parking spaces must be striped in a manner that is 

consistent with the standards of the controlling jurisdiction (FDOT) for other spaces and 

prominently outlined with blue paint, and must be repainted when necessary, to be clearly 

distinguishable as a parking space designated for persons who have disabilities. 2012 

ADA Standards 502.6.1 

k) There is an ice machine blocking the sidewalk from the access aisle to the main store 

entrance. Parking access aisles must be part of an accessible route to the building or 

facility entrance. Access aisles must be placed adjacent to accessible parking spaces. All 

spaces must be located on an accessible route that is at least 44 inches (1118 mm) wide 

so that users are not compelled to walk or wheel behind parked vehicles except behind 

his or her own vehicle.2012 ADA Standards 502.3 

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 6 of 15
7

l) The south corner non-compliant accessible parking space has a ramp built out into the 

access aisle. Parking spaces and access aisles serving them must comply with 302. 

Access aisles must be at the same level as the parking spaces they serve. Changes in level 

are not permitted. 2012 ADA Standards 502.4 

m) The non-compliant access aisle ground surface is rough and uneven. Access aisles extend 

the full length of the parking spaces they serve. Access aisles are required to be nearly 

level in all directions to provide a surface for wheelchair transfer to and from vehicles. 

The exception allows sufficient slope for drainage. 2012 ADA Standards 403.4, 502.3.2, 

502.4 

n) The south corner non-compliant accessible parking space does not have the correct 

ground markings. Accessible parking spaces must be striped in a manner that is 

consistent with the standards of the controlling jurisdiction (FDOT) for other spaces and 

prominently outlined with blue paint, and must be repainted when necessary, to be clearly 

distinguishable as a parking space designated for persons who have disabilities. 2012 

ADA Standards 502.6.1 

o) There were vehicles without accessible parking permit or license plates parked in and 

blocking the accessible parking spaces located in the parking facility. Designated 

accessible spaces must be designed and marked for the exclusive use of those individuals 

who have a severe physical disability and have permanent or temporary mobility 

problems that substantially impair their ability to ambulate and who have been issued 

either an accessible parking permit or license plate. 2010 ADA Standards 208.3.1, 502.3 

p) The facility does not provide compliant directional and informational signage to an 

accessible route which would lead to an accessible entrance. Where not all entrances 

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 7 of 15
8

comply, compliant entrances must be identified by the International Symbol of 

Accessibility. Directional signs that indicate the location of the nearest compliant 

entrance must be provided at entrances that do not comply. 2012 ADA Standards 216.6 

q) The customer service counter inside the store is too high. A portion of the counter surface 

that is 36 inches long minimum and 36 inches high maximum above the finish floor must 

be provided. 2012 ADA Standards 904.4.1

16. Upon information and belief there are other current violations of the ADA at Family 

Grocery Store. Only upon full inspection can all violations be identified. Accordingly, a 

complete list of violations will require an on-site inspection by Plaintiff’s representatives 

pursuant to Rule 34b of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

17. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that removal of the discriminatory barriers 

and violations is readily achievable and technically feasible. To date, the readily achievable 

barriers and other violations of the ADA still exist and have not been remedied or altered in such 

a way as to effectuate compliance with the provisions of the ADA.

18. Pursuant to the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12101 et. seq., and 28 C.F.R. §36.304, the Defendants 

were required to make the establishment a place of public accommodation, accessible to persons 

with disabilities by January 28, 1992. As of this date the Defendants have failed to comply with 

this mandate.

19. Plaintiff has been obligated to retain the undersigned counsel for the filing and 

prosecution of this action. Plaintiff is entitled to have its reasonable attorney's fees, costs and 

expenses paid by the Defendants, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12205.

20. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12188, this Court is vested with the authority to grant Plaintiff 

injunctive relief, including an Order to alter the subject facilities to make them readily accessible 

and useable by individuals with disabilities to the extent required by the ADA, closing the 

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 8 of 15
9

Subject Facility until the requisite modifications are completed, entering an Order directed at 

maintenance and future compliance, and entering an Order for Defendants to make reasonable 

modifications in policies, practices, or procedures.

21. The Defendants’ Facility has architectural barriers which Plaintiff personally encountered 

and/or has knowledge of. 

22. Defendants have failed to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or 

procedures to ensure full and equal enjoyment of goods, services, facilities, privileges, 

advantages and/or accommodations at the Defendants’ Facility to Plaintiff, and similarly situated 

individuals with disabilities.

23. Defendants have discriminated, and continue to discriminate against Plaintiff, and others 

who are similarly situated, by denying access to, and full and equal enjoyment of goods, 

services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations at the Subject Facility, as 

prohibited by 42 U.S.C. §12182, and 42 U.S.C. §12101 et. seq.; by failing to make reasonable 

modifications in policies, practices, or procedures pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(2)(A)(ii); and 

by failing to remove architectural barriers pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(2)(A)(iv).

24. Unless declared that the Subject Facility owned, operated and/or controlled by the 

Defendants is in violation of the ADA, Defendants shall continue to discriminate against 

Plaintiff, and others who are similarly situated, by denying access to, and full and equal 

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

Subject Facility.

25. Plaintiff has been obligated to retain the undersigned counsel for the filing and 

prosecution of this action. Plaintiff is entitled to have its reasonable attorney's fees, costs and 

expenses paid by the Defendants, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12205.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants and requests that this 

Honorable Court declare that the Subject Facility owned, operated and/or controlled by the 

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 9 of 15
10

Defendants is in violation of Title III of the ADA, and award reasonable attorney's fees, all costs 

(including, but not limited to court costs and expert fees) and other expenses of suit, to Plaintiff.

COUNT II- INJUNCTIVE RELIEF TO REMOVE ARCHITECTURAL BARRIERS

26. The Defendants’ Facility has architectural barriers which Plaintiff personally encountered 

and/or has knowledge of.

27. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that removal of the discriminatory barriers 

and violations is readily achievable and technically feasible. To date, the readily achievable 

barriers and other violations of the ADA still exist and have not been remedied or altered in such 

a way as to effectuate compliance with the provisions of the ADA. 

28. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendants shall continue to discriminate against Plaintiff, 

and others who are similarly situated, by denying access to, and full and equal enjoyment of 

goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations at the Subject Facility 

by failing to remove architectural barriers pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(2)(A)(iv).

29. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12188, this Court is vested with the authority to grant Plaintiff 

injunctive relief, including an Order to alter the subject facilities to make them readily accessible 

and useable by individuals with disabilities to the extent required by the ADA and closing the 

Subject Facility until the requisite modifications are completed.

30. Plaintiff has been obligated to retain the undersigned counsel for the filing and 

prosecution of this action. Plaintiff is entitled to have its reasonable attorney's fees, costs and 

expenses paid by the Defendants, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12205.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants and requests that this 

Honorable Court enter an Order requiring Defendants to alter the Subject Facility and remove 

architectural barriers to make the Subject Facility accessible to and usable by individuals with 

disabilities to the full extent required by Title III of the ADA, and award reasonable attorney's 

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 10 of 15
11

fees, all costs (including, but not limited to court costs and expert fees) and other expenses of 

suit, to Plaintiff.

COUNT III- INJUNCTIVE RELIEF TO MODIFY POLICIES, PRACTICES AND 

PROCEDURES

31. The Defendants’ Facility has architectural barriers which Plaintiff personally encountered 

and/or has knowledge of. 

32. Defendants have failed to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or 

procedures to ensure full and equal enjoyment of goods, services, facilities, privileges, 

advantages and/or accommodations at the Defendants’ Facility to Plaintiff, and similarly situated 

individuals with disabilities.

33. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendants shall continue to discriminate against Plaintiff, 

and others who are similarly situated, by denying access to, and full and equal enjoyment of 

goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations at the Subject Facility

by failing to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. §12182(b)(2)(A)(ii).

34. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12188, this Court is vested with the authority to grant Plaintiff 

injunctive relief, including an Order for Defendants to make reasonable modifications in policies, 

practices, or procedures.

35. Plaintiff has been obligated to retain the undersigned counsel for the filing and 

prosecution of this action. Plaintiff is entitled to have its reasonable attorney's fees, costs and 

expenses paid by the Defendants, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12205.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants and requests that this 

Honorable Court enter an Order requiring Defendants to evaluate, neutralize and modify their 

policies, practices and procedures as are necessary to make the Subject Facility accessible to and 

usable by individuals with disabilities to the full extent required by Title III of the ADA, and 

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 11 of 15
12

award reasonable attorney's fees, all costs (including, but not limited to court costs and expert

fees) and other expenses of suit, to Plaintiff.

COUNT IV- INJUNCTIVE RELIEF TO MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE

36. The Defendants’ Facility has architectural barriers which Plaintiff personally encountered 

and/or has knowledge of.

37. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that removal of the discriminatory barriers 

and violations is readily achievable and technically feasible. To date, the readily achievable 

barriers and other violations of the ADA still exist and have not been remedied or altered in such 

a way as to effectuate compliance with the provisions of the ADA.

38. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendants shall continue to discriminate against Plaintiff, 

and others who are similarly situated, by denying access to, and full and equal enjoyment of 

goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations at the Subject Facility

by failing to maintain compliance with the ADA by allowing physical alterations to revert back 

into noncompliance, and by failing to enforce any modifications in policies, practices, or 

procedures.

39. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12188, this Court is vested with the authority to grant Plaintiff 

injunctive relief, including an Order directed at maintenance and future compliance, and entering 

an Order for Defendants to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures.

40. Plaintiff has been obligated to retain the undersigned counsel for the filing and 

prosecution of this action. Plaintiff is entitled to have its reasonable attorney's fees, costs and 

expenses paid by the Defendants, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12205.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants and requests that this 

Honorable Court enter an Order requiring Defendants to maintain the alterations and 

modifications required to keep the Subject Facility accessible to and usable by individuals with 

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 12 of 15
13

disabilities and in compliance with Title III of the ADA, and award reasonable attorney's fees, all 

costs (including, but not limited to court costs and expert fees) and other expenses of suit, to 

Plaintiff.

Dated this September 2, 2022.

Respectfully submitted by:

Ronald E. Stern

Ronald E. Stern, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 10089

THE ADVOCACY LAW FIRM, P.A.

1250 East Hallandale Beach Boulevard, Suite 503

Hallandale Beach, Florida 33009

Telephone: (954) 639-7016

Facsimile: (954) 639-7198

Email: ronsternlaw@gmail.com

Attorney for Plaintiff, RENZO BARBERI

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 13 of 15
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.

RENZO BARBERI,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ARC GROCERY, INC., a Florida Profit 

Corporation and GARDEN PROPERTY 

786, INC., a Florida Profit Corporation,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on September 2, 2022, I electronically filed the Complaint 

along with a Summons for each Defendant with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify 

that the aforementioned documents are being served on all counsel of record, corporations, or pro 

se parties identified on the attached Service List in the manner specified via Service of Process 

by an authorized Process Server, and that all future pleadings, motions and documents will be 

served either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or via U.S. 

Mail for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of 

Electronic Filing.

By: Ronald E. Stern

Ronald E. Stern, Esq.

Florida Bar No.: 10089

THE ADVOCACY LAW FIRM, P.A.

1250 East Hallandale Beach Boulevard, Suite 503

Hallandale Beach, Florida 33009

Telephone: (954) 639-7016

Facsimile: (954) 639-7198

Email: ronsternlaw@gmail.com

Attorney for Plaintiff RENZO BARBERI

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 14 of 15
15

SERVICE LIST:

RENZO BARBERI, Plaintiff, vs. ARC GROCERY, INC., a Florida Profit Corporation and 

GARDEN PROPERTY 786, INC., a Florida Profit Corporation

United States District Court Southern District of Florida

CASE NO.

ARC GROCERY, INC.

REGISTERED AGENT:

CHOTAR, ABDULRAHAMAN

2950 SW 32ND AVE.

PEMBROKE PINES, FL 33023

VIA PROCESS SERVER 

GARDEN PROPERTY 786, INC.

REGISTERED AGENT:

SACHWANI, ZAINAB Q.

2160 SW 119 TER

DAVIE, FL 33325

VIA PROCESS SERVER 

Case 0:22-cv-61641-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 15 of 15