1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

ALEJANDRO ESPINOZA, CASE NO.

 Plaintiff,

vs.

WEST MARINE PRODUCTS, INC.,

a Florida Profit Corporation

D/B/A WEST MARINE 

Defendant,

____________________________________________/

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND

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

WEST MARINE PRODUCTS, INC., a foreign corporation d/b/a WEST MARINE (hereinafter 

referred to as “WEST MARINE”), for declaratory and injunctive relief, and damages, and alleges 

as follows:

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

codified in 42 U.S.C. §§12181-12189. 

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

2) 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.

3) 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.

4) Plaintiff is sui juris, and he is disabled as defined by the ADA and ADA Amendments Act 

of 2008, 42 U.S.C. §12101 (“ADAAA”).

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 1 of 25
2

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

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

internet website to purchase sweatpants.

7) 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.

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

trespass to Plaintiff’s personal property.

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

be sought in connection with suits brought under the ADA.

10) 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.

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

Division of the Southern District of Florida.

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

Amaurosis since birth that substantially impairs Plaintiff’s vision whereby his vision fluctuates 

from 20/250 to 20/800. 

13) Plaintiff’s visual impairment interferes with his day-to-day activities and causes limitations 

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

14) In addition, Plaintiff is an advocate of the rights of similarly situated disabled persons. As 

such is a “tester” for the purposes of asserting his civil rights and monitoring, ensuring, and 

determining whether places of public accommodation and/or their respective and associated 

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 2 of 25
3

websites are in compliance with the ADA and any other applicable disability laws, regulations, 

and ordinances.

15) Plaintiff is limited in the performance of major life activities due to his visual disability 

and he requires assistive technologies, auxiliary aids, and services for effective communication, 

including communication in connection with his use of a computer.

16) Plaintiff uses the computer regularly, but due to his visual disability, Plaintiff cannot use 

his computer without the assistance of appropriate and available auxiliary aids, screen reader 

software, and other technology and assistance. In order to assist him, Plaintiff uses NVDA screen 

reader software that is readily available commercially. As background, screen reader software 

translates the visual internet into an auditory equivalent. The software reads the content of a 

webpage to the user at a rapid pace.

17) “The screen reading software uses auditory cues to allow a visually impaired user to 

effectively use websites. For example, when using the visual internet, a seeing user learns that a 

link may be ‘clicked,’ which will bring him to another webpage, through visual cues, such as a 

change in the color of the text (often text is turned from black to blue). When the sighted user's 

cursor hovers over the link, it changes from an arrow symbol to a hand. The screen reading 

software uses auditory -- rather than visual -- cues to relay this same information. When a sight 

impaired individual reaches a link that may be ‘clicked on,’ the software reads the link to the user, 

and after reading the text of the link says the word ‘clickable.’...Through a series of auditory cues 

read aloud by the screen reader, the visually impaired user can navigate a website by listening and 

responding with his keyboard.” Andrews v. Blick Art Materials, LLC, 17-CV-767, 2017 WL 

6542466, at *6-7 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 21, 2017).

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 3 of 25
4

18) Plaintiff frequently accesses the internet. Because he is significantly and permanently 

visually disabled, to effectively communicate and comprehend information available on the 

internet and thereby access and comprehend websites, Plaintiff uses commercially available screen 

reader software to interface with the various websites.

19) Defendant, WEST MARINE, is a Florida Profit Corporation authorized to do business and 

doing business in the State of Florida.

20) Defendant, WEST MARINE, is a company that sells anchors and docking supplies, boats, 

motors, marine electronics, navigation devices, engine systems, fishing equipment, boat and 

outdoor décor and accessories, boat maintenance supplies, safety equipment, sailing supplies, boat 

seating and deck covers, boat trailer parts, plumbing and ventilation supplies, paddles, water sport 

equipment, clothing, shoes, and accessories. There is a retail location in Miami-Dade County. 

21) At all times material hereto, Defendant was and still is a private entity which owns and 

operates retail locations under the brand name “WEST MARINE”.. 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).

22) Because Defendants are a store open to the public, each of Defendants’ physical stores is 

a place of public accommodation subject to the requirements of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12182, 

§12181(7)(B), and its implementing regulations, 28 C.F.R. Part 36.

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

operating the website located at https://www.westmarine.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 

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 4 of 25
5

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

Defendant has subjected itself and the associated website it created and maintains to the 

requirements of the ADA. The website also services Defendant’s physical stores by providing 

information on its brand 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 products, 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, the website is an extension of, and gateway to, Defendant’s physical stores 

which are places of public accommodation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12181(7)(E). By this nexus 

between Defendants’ retail store locations and the Website, and the fact that the Website clearly 

provides support for and is connected to Defendants’ stores for its operation and use, the Website 

is an intangible service, privilege, and advantage of Defendants’ brick-and-mortar stores that must 

comply with all requirements of the ADA. The Website must not discriminate against individuals 

with disabilities, and must not deny those individuals the same full and equal access to and 

enjoyment of the goods, services, privileges, and advantages as afforded the non-visually disabled 

public both online and in the physical stores, which are places of public accommodations subject 

to the requirements of the ADA.

25) Plaintiff sought to, seeks to and intends to patronize, in the near future once the Website’s 

access barriers are removed or remedied, one or more of Defendants’ physical retail locations, 

check store hours and product pricing and place online orders. In the alternative, Plaintiff intends 

to monitor the Website in the near future as a tester to ascertain whether it has been remedied and 

updated to interact properly with screen reader software.

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 5 of 25
6

26) Traveling outside of his home as a visually disabled individual is often a difficult, 

hazardous, frightening, frustrating, and confusing experience, thus the opportunity to shop and preshop Defendants’ products, plan his visits, and to compare products, services, prices, sales, 

discounts, and promotions are important and necessary accommodations for Plaintiff because 

Defendants have 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.

27) During the month of November 2022, Plaintiff attempted on a number of occasions to 

utilize the Website to browse through the merchandise and online offers to educate himself as to 

the merchandise, sales, discounts, and promotions being offered, learn about the brick-and-mortar 

location, check store hours, and check product pricing with the intent to make a purchase through 

the Website or in one of the physical locations and with the intent to make a purchase through the 

website or at one of Defendant’s physical stores. Plaintiff also attempted to access and utilize the 

Website in his capacity as a tester to determine whether it was accessible to blind and visually 

disabled persons such as himself who use screen reader software to access and navigate company 

websites.

28) Plaintiff utilized NVDA (“Screen Reader Software”) that allows individuals who are blind 

and visually disabled to communicate with websites. However, Defendant’s Website contains 

access barriers that prevent free and full use by blind and visually disabled individuals using 

keyboards and available screen reader software. Plaintiff attempted to purchase clothing 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.

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 6 of 25
7

29) Defendant’s Website contains access barriers that prevent free and full use by blind and 

visually disabled individuals using keyboards and available screen reader software. These 

barriers are pervasive and include, but are not limited to:

System settings while doing the review:

Operating system: Windows 10

Browser: Google Chrome v. 106.0.5249.119

Screen Reader: NVDA v. 2022.3

List of a few of the violations encountered:

Violation: When a user selects a product size, the page reloads, and the focus order shifts 

to the top of the page. This is not the expected sequence and focus order. After selecting a 

size the focus should shift to the quantity.

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

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4dnxlmgh1u3frlm/2022_10_13_200404_01.mp4?dl=0

Violation: Within the Contact Information step of the checkout process, when a user tabs 

to the plus plus button, the focus order shifts back to the Change Store link. This is not 

the expected sequence and focus order. User should be able to tab past the plus plus 

button to access the content that’s immediately after it – shipping.

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

Screen Capture Evidence: 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/r6915za57xxiita/2022_10_13_200404_02.mp4?dl=0

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 7 of 25
8

Violation: Because of the focus order violation listed above, where the user can’t tab past 

the plus plus button, some functionality on that page is not operable through the keyboard 

interface. This includes selecting a shipping option and entering a promo code.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 2.1.1 Keyboard (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/r6915za57xxiita/2022_10_13_200404_02.mp4?dl=0

Violation: Within the Delivery step of the checkout process, cycling and selecting the 

different shipping methods available is not fully operable through the keyboard interface. 

When the user tries to go from Standard Delivery to 2 Day, the focus instead shifts to the 

last option – Truck Freight. Once there, using the arrow keys does not allow the user to 

go back to the options above it.

Applicable WCAG 2.1 Standard at Issue: Standard 2.1.1 Keyboard (Level A).

Screen Capture Evidence:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cjtx74i53e63tpb/2022_10_13_200404_03.mp4?dl=0

Violation: Throughout the steps of the checkout process, there is no audible context given 

to the Edit button corresponding to Contact Information and Delivery. It should have a 

more extensive audible explanation detailing what is editable by activating that button.

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

Screen Capture Evidence:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/oltfkbt4cr2isl3/2022_10_13_200404_04.mp4?dl=0

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 8 of 25
9

30) Although the Website appeared to have an “accessibility” statement displayed and an 

“accessibility” widget/plugin added, the “accessibility” statement and widget/plugin, when 

tested, still could not be effectively accessed by, and continued to be a barrier to, blind and 

visually disabled persons, including Plaintiff as a completely blind person. Plaintiff, although he 

attempted to access the statement, thus, was unable to receive any meaningful or prompt 

assistance through the “accessibility” statement and the widget/plugin to enable him to quickly, 

fully, and effectively navigate the Website.

31) The fact that Plaintiff could not communicate with or within the Website left him feeling 

excluded, as he is unable to participate in the same shopping experience, with the same access to 

the merchandise, sales, discounts, and promotions, as provided at the Website and in the physical 

locations as the non-visually disabled public.

32) Plaintiff desires and intends, in the near future once the Website’s access barriers are 

removed or remedied, to patronize one or more of Defendants’ physical stores and to use the 

Website, but he is presently unable to do so as he is unable to effectively communicate with 

Defendants due to his severe visual disability and the Website’s access barriers. Alternatively, as 

a tester using screen reader software, Plaintiff is unable to effectively access, navigate, and 

communicate with Defendants through the Website due to his severe visual disability and the 

Website’s access barriers. Thus, Plaintiff, as well as others who are blind and with visual 

disabilities, will suffer continuous and ongoing harm from Defendants’ intentional acts, omissions, 

policies, and practices as set forth herein unless properly enjoined by this Court.

33) On information and belief, Defendants have not initiated a Web Accessibility Policy to 

ensure full and equal use of the Website by individuals with disabilities.

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 9 of 25
10

34) On information and belief, Defendants have not instituted a Web Accessibility Committee 

to ensure full and equal use of Website by individuals with disabilities.

35) On information and belief, Defendants have not designated an employee as a Web 

Accessibility Coordinator to ensure full and equal use of the Website by individuals with 

disabilities.

36) On information and belief, Defendants have not instituted a Web Accessibility User 

Accessibility Testing Group to ensure full and equal use of the Website by individuals with 

disabilities.

37) On information and belief, Defendants have not instituted a User Accessibility Testing 

Group to ensure full and equal use of the Website by individuals with disabilities.

38) On information and belief, Defendants have not instituted a Bug Fix Priority Policy.

39) On information and belief, Defendants have not instituted an Automated Web Accessibility 

Testing program.

40) Defendants have not created and instituted an effective Specialized Customer Assistance 

line or service or email contact mode for customer assistance for the visually disabled.

41) Defendants have not created and instituted on the Website a useful or accessible page for 

individuals with disabilities, nor displayed a link and information hotline, nor created an 

information portal explaining when and how Defendants will have the Website, applications, and 

digital assets accessible to the visually disabled or blind community.

42) The Website does not meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (“WCAG”) 2.0 

Level AA or higher versions of web accessibility.

43) Defendants have not disclosed to the public any intended audits, changes, or lawsuits to 

correct the inaccessibility of the Website to visually disabled individuals who want the safety and 

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 10 of 25
11

privacy of purchasing Defendants’ products offered on the Website and in the physical stores from 

their homes.

44) Defendants thus have not provided full and equal access to and enjoyment of the goods, 

services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations provided by and through the 

Website and their physical stores in contravention of the ADA.

45) Public accommodations under the ADA must ensure that their places of public 

accommodation provide effective communication for all members of the general public, including 

individuals with visual disabilities such as Plaintiff. 

46) The broad mandate of the ADA is to provide an equal opportunity for individuals with 

disabilities to participate in and benefit from all aspects of American civic and economic life. That 

mandate extends to internet shopping websites such as the Website at issue in the instant action.

47) Defendants are, and at all relevant times have been, aware of the barriers to effective 

communication within the Website which prevent individuals with visual disabilities from the 

means to comprehend information presented therein.

48) Defendants are, and at all relevant times have been, aware of the need to provide full access 

to all visitors to the Website.

49) The barriers that exist on the Website result in discriminatory and unequal treatment of 

individuals with visual disabilities, including Plaintiff.

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

hereinabove, and this suit for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief is his only means to secure 

adequate and complete redress from Defendants’ unlawful and discriminatory practices in 

connection with its website access and operation.

51) Notice to Defendants is not required because of Defendants’ failure to cure the violations.

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 11 of 25
12

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

§§2201 and 2202.

53) Plaintiff has retained the undersigned attorneys to represent him in this case and has agreed 

to pay them a reasonable fee for their services.

COUNT I – VIOLATION OF THE ADA

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

55) Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12181(7)(B), Defendant is a public accommodation under the ADA 

and thus is subject to the ADA.

56) Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12181(7)(B), the Website is covered under the ADA because it 

provides the general public with the ability to view the products available at Defendant’s locations, 

purchase products 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. The Website thus is an extension of, gateway to, and intangible service, privilege, and 

advantage of Defendants’ physical locations. Further, the Website also serves to augment 

Defendants’ physical stores by providing the public information about the stores and by educating 

the public as to Defendants’ brand and available products merchandise sold through the Website 

and in the physical stores.

57) Under Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(1)(A)(II), it is unlawful discrimination 

to deny individuals with disabilities or a class of individuals with disabilities an opportunity to 

participate in or benefit from the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or 

accommodation, which is equal to the opportunities afforded to other individuals.

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 12 of 25
13

58) Specifically, under Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(2)(A)(II), unlawful 

discrimination includes, among other things, “a failure to make reasonable modifications in 

policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford such goods, 

services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to individuals with disabilities, 

unless the entity can demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally alter the 

nature of such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations.”

59) In addition, under Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(2)(A)(III), unlawful 

discrimination includes, among other things, “a failure to take such steps, as 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, 

unless the entity can demonstrate that taking such steps would fundamentally alter the nature of 

the good, service, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation being offered or would result 

in an undue burden.”

60) The Website must comply with the ADA, but it does not as specifically alleged hereinabove 

and below.

61) Because of the inaccessibility of the Website, individuals with visual disabilities are denied 

full and equal access to and enjoyment of the goods, information, and services that Defendants 

have made available to the public on the Website and in their physical stores in violation of 42 

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

62) The Website was subsequently visited by Plaintiff’s expert in November and the expert 

determination was that the same access barriers that Plaintiff had initially encountered, as well as 

numerous additional access barriers, existed. Defendants thus have made insufficient material 

changes or improvements to the Website to enable its full use and enjoyment by, and accessibility 

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 13 of 25
14

to, blind and visually disabled persons such as Plaintiff. Also, when the Website was visited by 

the expert, although the Website appeared to have an “accessibility” statement and widget/plugin 

linked on and displayed from its home page, the “accessibility” statement and widget/plugin, when 

tested, still could not be effectively used or accessed by, and continued to be a barrier to, blind and 

visually disabled persons such as Plaintiff. Defendant furthermore has not disclosed to the public 

any intended audits, changes, or lawsuits to correct the inaccessibility of the Website to visually 

disabled individuals, nor has it posted on the Website an effective and useful “accessibility” notice, 

statement, or policy to provide blind and visually disabled person such as Plaintiff with a viable 

alternative means to access and navigate the Website. Defendant thus has failed to make reasonable 

modifications in its policies, practices, or procedures when such modifications are necessary to 

afford goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to individuals with 

disabilities, in violation of 28 C.F.R. §36.302. The lack of a viable and effective “accessibility” 

notice, policy, or statement and the numerous access barriers as set forth in the Declaration of 

Plaintiff’s expert, Raul Marquez, attached hereto and the contents of which are incorporated herein 

by reference, continue to render the Website not fully accessible to users who are blind and visually 

disabled, including Plaintiff.

63) More violations may be present on other pages of the Website, which can and will be 

determined and proven through the discovery process in this case.

64) There are readily available, well-established guidelines on the internet for making Websites 

accessible to the blind and visually disabled. These guidelines have been followed by other large 

business entities in making their websites accessible. Examples of such guidelines include, but are 

not limited to, adding alt-text to graphics and ensuring that all functions can be performed using a 

keyboard. Incorporating such basic components to make the Website accessible would neither 

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 14 of 25
15

fundamentally alter the nature of Defendants’ business nor would it result in an undue burden to 

Defendants.

65) Defendants have violated the ADA -- and continue to violate the ADA -- by denying access 

to the Website by individuals such as Plaintiff with visual disabilities who require the assistance 

of interface with screen reader software to comprehend and access internet websites. These 

violations within the Website are ongoing.

66) The ADA requires that public accommodations and places of public accommodation 

ensure that communication is effective.

67) According to 28 C.F.R. §36.303(b)(1), auxiliary aids and services include “voice, text, and 

video-based telecommunications products and systems”. Indeed, 28 C.F.R.§36.303(b)(2) 

specifically states that screen reader software is an effective method of making visually delivered 

material available to individuals who are blind or have low vision.

68) According to 28 C.F.R. §36.303(c), public accommodations must furnish appropriate 

auxiliary aids and services where necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals 

with disabilities: “In order to be effective, auxiliary aids and services must be provided in 

accessible formats, in a timely manner, and in such a way as to protect the privacy and 

independence of the individual with a disability,” 28 C.F.R. §36.303(c)(1)(ii).

69) Part 36 of Title 28 of the C.F.R. was designed and is implemented to effectuate subtitle A 

of Title III of the ADA, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public 

accommodations, and requires places of public accommodation to be designed, constructed, and 

altered in compliance with the accessibility standards established by Part 36.

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 15 of 25
16

70) As alleged hereinabove, the Website has not been designed to interface with the widely 

and readily available technologies that can be used to ensure effective communication, and thus 

violates the ADA.

71) As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ failure to provide an ADA compliant 

Website, with a nexus to their brick-and-mortar stores, Plaintiff has suffered an injury in fact by 

being denied full access to, enjoyment of, and communication with Defendants’ Website and its 

physical stores.

72) Because of the inadequate development and administration of the Website, Plaintiff is 

entitled to injunctive relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12133 and 28 C.F.R. §36.303, to remedy the 

ongoing disability discrimination.

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

appropriate and necessary injunctive relief, including an order to: 

i. Require Defendants to adopt and implement a web accessibility policy to make 

publicly available and directly link from the homepage of the Website to a functional 

statement as to the Defendants’ policy to ensure persons with disabilities have full and 

equal access to and enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, 

and accommodations through the Website and the physical locations.

ii. Require Defendants to take the necessary steps to make the Website readily accessible 

to and usable by blind and visually disabled users, and during that time period prior to 

the Website’s being made readily accessible, provide an effective alternative method 

for individuals with visual disabilities to access the information available on the 

Website until such time that the requisite modifications are made, and

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 16 of 25
17

iii. Require Defendants to provide the appropriate auxiliary aids such that individuals with 

visual disabilities will be able to effectively communicate with the Website for 

purposes of viewing and locating Defendants’ stores and becoming informed of and 

purchasing Defendants’ products, and during that time period prior to the Website’s 

being designed to permit individuals with visual disabilities to effectively 

communicate, to provide an alternative method for individuals with visual disabilities 

to effectively communicate for such goods and services made available to the general 

public through the Website and the physical stores.

iv. Plaintiff is entitled to recover his reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses 

pursuant to the ADA. To that end, Plaintiff has been obligated to retain the 

undersigned counsel for the filing and prosecution of this action and has agreed to pay 

them a reasonable fee for their services.

74) WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests entry of judgment in his favor and against Defendant for 

the following relief: 

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

c. 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-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 17 of 25
18

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

disabled logo within its website, wherein the logo 1would 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;

e. 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.

f. 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;

g. 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;

h. 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;

i. 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 

1

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 18 of 25
19

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;

j. 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 applicable accessibility guidelines, and further 

directing Defendant to send a copy of the twelve (12) quarterly reports to Plaintiff’s 

counsel for review.

k. 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.

l. An award to Plaintiff of his 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. 

COUNT II – TRESPASS

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

75) 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.

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 19 of 25
20

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

software on his computer. 

77) The “pop-up” or banner notice that appears on Defendant’s website does not properly 

audibilize the cookies policy in a way where a visually disabled person like the Plaintiff can 

properly understand or give informed consent to allow tracking cookies to be placed on his 

computer. 

78) 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 his personal computer, which was done without his knowledge and consent.

79) Defendant’s trespass has damaged Plaintiff by affecting the condition and value of his

computer. 

80) 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:

Privacy Policy

What is West Marine's Privacy Policy and Practices?

West Marine respects the privacy needs and concerns of our customers. We appreciate 

the trust you place in us when you choose to visit our stores or websites and we take that 

responsibility seriously. This policy (“Privacy Policy”) is to inform you about what kinds 

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 20 of 25
21

of information we collect about you, including personally identifying information, how 

we use it, with whom it is shared and the choices you have regarding our use of that 

information.

By “personally identifying information”, we mean information that directly identifies 

you, such as your name, driver’s license number, date of birth, Social Security number, 

IP address, device ID, credit/debit card information, telephone number, mailing address, 

or email address. In this Policy, “we” and “our” mean West Marine, Inc., and “you” or 

“your” mean any person who visits our website. To clarify, the given meaning of 

“Personal information” under this policy is in addition to the definition provided by the 

applicable law.

Although this Privacy Policy may seem long, it explains the details of our data collection 

and use of your information because we believe you should know as much as possible 

about our practices to make informed decisions.

Collection of Your Information

We collect a few categories of information, from a few different sources:

Information You Provide: We receive information you provide to us when you:

1. Create an account with us (including a shopping account online, an account to review 

products, a West Advantage Account or event registration account or any other type 

of account);

2. Make a purchase by using any method;

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 21 of 25
22

3. Apply for employment opportunities;

4. Review any products;

5. Contact us via any customer service method;

6. Submit user-generated content (via our Sites, Internet Marketing Channels or 

otherwise);

7. Participate in customer research, surveys, sweepstakes, contests, or promotions;

8. Subscribe for email, text, or other messages;

9. Work with our Teammates/Associates who provide you with in-store services or 

otherwise assist you with your product needs and purchases through use of Sites;

10. Download or use our Sites;

11. File a claim or participate in investigations regarding claims or losses; or

12. Otherwise communicate information to us.

Information Received From Third Parties

We may receive information you provide on behalf of third parties, or third parties 

provide on your behalf, including but not limited to gift recipients, online 

registrations/purchases, ship-from-store, in-store pick-up, registries or as a result of your 

interactions with other users on our team sports or event Sites.

We receive information from sources assisting us with (i) updating, enhancing, 

improving and/or analyzing our records or data; (ii) performing marketing and research 

services; or (iii) detecting fraud or theft. We may also acquire information about you 

from third parties with whom we have a relationship or otherwise contract with to obtain 

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 22 of 25
23

such information. In the event we acquire a business, we may receive information from 

the seller of such business. Additionally, we may receive information from various 

consumer reporting agencies and related service providers.

We also work with third-party service providers that provide us feedback about our Sites 

and analytics and general information about browsing patterns to improve our Sites and 

our Internet Marketing Channels.

Information That Is Passively Collected When You Use The Sites

We automatically receive and store certain types of information when you use West 

Marine website, such as information about your use, including your interaction with 

content and services available through West Marine. Like many websites, we use cookies 

and other unique identifiers and we obtain certain types of information when your web 

browser or device accesses West Marine and other content served by or on behalf of 

West Marine on other websites. When you visit our Sites or interact with us through your 

device, (including Wi-Fi, Bluetooth or other technologies in our stores) we may collect 

"User Activity Information" through Cookies, Web Beacons and other similar or related 

technologies (collectively, "Information Technologies").

"Cookies" are small text files sent to your device as you visit our Sites or utilize our 

Internet Marketing Channels and saved on your device via your browser. "Web Beacons" 

(also known as pixels or tags) are a common form of web technology used on our Sites 

and Internet Marketing Channels to monitor visits to certain pages within, interactions 

with, and the effectiveness of, our Sites and our Internet Marketing Channels.

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 23 of 25
24

User Activity Information we collect through these Information Technologies includes 

internet protocol (IP) addresses, device characteristics (such as connection type, operating 

system, browser type, screen resolution), location information, user ID, and your 

interactions with our Sites and Internet Marketing Channels, such as which webpages you 

visit, your keyword searches, and the products or product categories viewed. User 

activity information may also include information about: your mobile device if it is being 

used to visit the Sites (such as device model, operating system, unique device identifiers, 

and mobile network information); how you use our Sites and Internet Marketing 

Channels, search terms, pages you visit on our Sites and application performance 

information. In addition, while User Activity Information does not generally identify or 

relate to you as an individual, we may associate this type of information with you as an 

individual and may also determine your general location from this information. In 

addition, others might seek to make such associations or determinations, and we cannot 

guarantee that parties with whom we may share such information might not succeed in 

re-identifying or associating non-personal information with particular individuals; we 

cannot be responsible for such parties’ use of such information. The information we learn 

from you during your visit helps us to improve our site, respond to your requests and 

customize your shopping experience with West Marine.

81) Due to Plaintiff’s disability, he could not understand Defendant’s website and he could not 

give informed consent to Defendant’s installation of data and information tracking software on his

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

browsing history and the placement of analytics on his computer.

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 24 of 25
25

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

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

should be installed and operated on his 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

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: radamslaw7@gmail.com

By: /s/ 

RICHARD J. ADAMS, ESQ.

FL BAR NO.: 770434

Case 1:22-cv-23946-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2022 Page 25 of 25