1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

Rebecca Castillo, :

:

Plaintiff, : Case No. 2:17-CV-841

:

v. : Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus

: 

White Castle Management Company, : Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura

: 

Defendant. :

ANSWER AND DEFENSES OF DEFENDANT WHITE CASTLE 

MANAGEMENT COMPANY TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

For its Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant White Castle Management Company 

(“White Castle”), hereby states the following:

ANSWER

1. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 1 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

2. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 2 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

3. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 3 of the Complaint, except to 

admit that it operates a website, www.whitecastle.com.

4. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 4 of the Complaint.

5. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 5 of the Complaint.

6. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint.

7. Paragraph 7 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle admits that this Court has subject 

matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because Plaintiff alleges claims under 

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 1 of 15 PAGEID #: 38
2

Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and denies the remaining allegations in 

Paragraph 7 of the Complaint.

8. Paragraph 8 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 8 

of the Complaint.

9. Paragraph 9 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle admits the allegations in Paragraph 9 

of the Complaint.

10. Paragraph 10 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 

10 of the Complaint as it relates to the Northern District of Ohio but admits the allegations in 

Paragraph 10 as it relates to this Court.

11. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 11 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

12. White Castle admits that its headquarters is located in Columbus, Ohio; denies the 

remaining allegations in Paragraph 12 of the Complaint; and avers that related entity White 

Castle System, Inc. operates restaurants.

13. White Castle admits that its mobile app and website facilitate online ordering for 

pick up, searches for locations, learning about product information, and learning about discount 

offers and deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph 13 of the Complaint.

14. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 14 of the Complaint.

15. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 15 of the Complaint.

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 2 of 15 PAGEID #: 39
3

16. White Castle admits that the Internet is used for information, conducting business, 

and shopping, learning, banking, researching, and other activities and denies the remaining 

allegations in Paragraph 16 of the Complaint for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to their truth.

17. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 17 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

18. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 18 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

19. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 19 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

20. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 20 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

21. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 21 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

22. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 22 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

23. Paragraph 23 of the Complaint states legal conclusions and/or quotes federal law 

to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle admits that 

Plaintiff has accurately quoted the ADA and its implementing regulations and denies the 

remaining allegations on Paragraph 23 as it pertains to White Castle’s website and mobile app

and other websites and mobile applications.

24. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 24 of the Complaint.

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 3 of 15 PAGEID #: 40
4

25. White Castle denies that it is on notice of any general mandate in the ADA 

applicable to websites and states that the remaining allegations in Paragraph 25 state legal 

conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle 

denies that the ADA applies to websites and denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 25 for 

lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

26. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 26 and 26 (a)-(q) of the 

Complaint for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

27. White Castle admits the allegations in Paragraph 27 of the Complaint.

28. In response to Paragraph 28 of the Complaint, it is unclear what is meant by 

“should allow,” and therefore, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 28 of the 

Complaint. White Castle avers that consumers can locate physical locations where its products 

may be purchased, browse its menu, and order food for pick up at its locations through its 

website and mobile app.

29. In response to Paragraph 29 of the Complaint, it is unclear what is meant by 

“should allow,” and therefore, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 29 of the 

Complaint. White Castle avers that consumers can locate physical locations where its products 

may be purchased, browse its menu, order food for pick up at its locations, learn about products, 

and learn about sales and offers through its website and mobile app.

30. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 30 of the Complaint.

31. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 31 of the Complaint.

32. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 32 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 4 of 15 PAGEID #: 41
5

33. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 33 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

34. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 34 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

35. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 35 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

36. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 36 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

37. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 37 of the Complaint, except to 

deny for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations about Plaintiff’s actions.

38. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 38 of the Complaint, except to 

deny for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations about Plaintiff’s actions.

39. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 39 of the Complaint, except to 

deny for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations about Plaintiff’s actions and thought processes.

40. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 40 of the Complaint, except to 

deny for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations about Plaintiff’s actions and thought processes.

41. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 41 and 41(a)-(e) of the 

Complaint, except to deny for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to 

the truth of the allegations about Plaintiff’s actions and thought processes.

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 5 of 15 PAGEID #: 42
6

42. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 42 of the Complaint, except to 

deny for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations about Plaintiff’s actions.

43. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 43 of the Complaint, except to 

deny for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations about Plaintiff’s actions.

44. White Castle denies for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a 

belief as to the truth of the allegation that Plaintiff has made past and recent attempts to do 

business with White Castle on its website and mobile app and denies the remaining allegations in 

Paragraph 44 of the Complaint.

45. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 45 of the Complaint, except to 

deny for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations about Plaintiff’s actions and thought processes.

46. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 46 of the Complaint.

47. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 47 of the Complaint, except to 

deny for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations about Plaintiff’s actions and thought processes.

48. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 48 of the Complaint, except to 

deny for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations about Plaintiff’s actions and thought processes.

49. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 49 of the Complaint.

50. White Castle denies for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a 

belief as to the truth of the allegations that Plaintiff has made multiple attempts to use White 

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 6 of 15 PAGEID #: 43
7

Castle’s website and mobile app and regarding Plaintiff’s knowledge and denies the remaining 

allegations in Paragraph 50 of the Complaint.

51. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 51 and 51(a)-(c) of the 

Complaint.

52. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 52 of the Complaint.

53. Paragraph 53 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle admits that Plaintiff has accurately 

quoted the ADA and denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 53 of the Complaint.

54. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 54 of the Complaint and that 

Plaintiff is entitled to the requested relief.

55. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 55 of the Complaint and that 

Plaintiff is entitled to the requested relief in Paragraph 55 and 55(a)-(d).

56. White Castle denies that its website and mobile app are inaccessible and denies 

the remaining allegations in Paragraph 56 of the Complaint for lack of knowledge or information 

sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

57. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 57 of the Complaint.

58. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 58 of the Complaint.

COUNT I

VIOLATIONS OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

59. White Castle re-alleges and re-incorporates its responses to the allegations in its 

answers to Paragraphs 1 through 58 of the Complaint, as if fully re-written here.

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 7 of 15 PAGEID #: 44
8

60. Paragraph 60 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle admits that Plaintiff has accurately 

quoted the cited section of the ADA.

61. Paragraph 61 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 

61 of the Complaint.

62. Paragraph 62 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 

62 of the Complaint.

63. Paragraph 63 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 

63 of the Complaint.

64. Paragraph 64 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle admits the allegations in Paragraph 

64 as accurately summarizing the cited section of the ADA.

65. Paragraph 65 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 

65 of the Complaint because they do not accurately quote the cited section of the ADA.

66. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 66 of the Complaint.

67. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 67 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

68. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 68 of the Complaint.

69. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 69 of the Complaint.

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 8 of 15 PAGEID #: 45
9

70. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 70 of the Complaint and that 

Plaintiff is entitled to the requested relief.

COUNT II

VIOLATIONS OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

71. White Castle re-alleges and re-incorporates its responses to the allegations in its 

answers to Paragraphs 1 through 70 of the Complaint, as if fully re-written here.

72. Paragraph 72 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle admits that Plaintiff has accurately 

quoted the cited section of the ADA.

73. Paragraph 73 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 

73 of the Complaint.

74. Paragraph 74 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 

74 of the Complaint.

75. Paragraph 75 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 

75 of the Complaint.

76. Paragraph 76 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle admits the allegations in Paragraph 

76 as accurately summarizing the cited section of the ADA.

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 9 of 15 PAGEID #: 46
10

77. Paragraph 77 of the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is 

required. To the extent a response is required, White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 

77 of the Complaint because they do not accurately quote the cited section of the ADA.

78. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 78 of the Complaint.

79. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 79 of the Complaint for lack of 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth.

80. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 80 of the Complaint.

81. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 81 of the Complaint.

82. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 82 of the Complaint and that 

Plaintiff is entitled to the requested relief.

COUNT III

VIOLATIONS OF THE UNRUH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 

CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE § 51, ET SEQ.

89.

1 White Castle re-alleges and re-incorporates its responses to the allegations in its 

answers to Paragraphs 1 through 82 of the Complaint, as if fully re-written here.

90. White Castle denies that it is systematically or otherwise violating the Unruh Civil 

Rights Act (UCRA), California Civil Code § 51, et seq. The remaining allegations in Paragraph 

90 of the Complaint state legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a 

response is required, White Castle admits the remaining allegations in Paragraph 90 as accurately 

summarizing the cited section of the UCRA.

91. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 91 of the Complaint.

92. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 92 of the Complaint.

93. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 93 of the Complaint.

 

1

Plaintiff’s Complaint skips Paragraphs 83-88, so for clarity, White Castle skipped Paragraphs 83-88 in its answer. 

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 10 of 15 PAGEID #: 47
11

94. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 94 of the Complaint and that 

Plaintiff is entitled to the requested relief.

95. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 95 of the Complaint and that 

Plaintiff is entitled to the requested relief.

96. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 96 of the Complaint and that 

Plaintiff is entitled to the requested relief.

COUNT IV

VIOLATIONS OF THE UNRUH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 

CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE § 51, ET SEQ.

97. White Castle re-alleges and re-incorporates its responses to the allegations in its 

answers to Paragraphs 1 through 96 of the Complaint, as if fully re-written here.

98. White Castle denies that it is systematically or otherwise violating the Unruh Civil 

Rights Act, California Civil Code § 51, et seq. (“UCRA”). The remaining allegations in 

Paragraph 98 of the Complaint state legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the 

extent a response is required, White Castle admits the remaining allegations in Paragraph 98 as 

accurately summarizing the cited section of the UCRA.

99. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 99 of the Complaint.

100. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 100 of the Complaint.

101. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 101 of the Complaint.

102. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 102 of the Complaint and that 

Plaintiff is entitled to the requested relief.

103. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 103 of the Complaint and that 

Plaintiff is entitled to the requested relief.

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 11 of 15 PAGEID #: 48
12

104. White Castle denies the allegations in Paragraph 104 of the Complaint and that 

Plaintiff is entitled to the requested relief.

105. White Castle denies any allegations in the Complaint not expressly admitted 

herein.

FIRST DEFENSE

106. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon 

which relief can be granted.

SECOND DEFENSE

107. Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, where the removal of any alleged 

barriers is not readily achievable.

THIRD DEFENSE

108. Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by a lack of standing to bring the 

claims alleged in the Complaint.

FOURTH DEFENSE

109. Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by a failure to exhaust 

administrative remedies and/or failure to put White Castle on notice of which specific alterations 

to the website and/or mobile app were necessary.

FIFTH DEFENSE

110. Due process bars Plaintiff from asserting claims based on the accessibility of 

websites and mobile apps where there are no legal standards for compliance.

SIXTH DEFENSE

111. White Castle’s website and mobile app are not public accommodations.

SEVENTH DEFENSE

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 12 of 15 PAGEID #: 49
13

112. White Castle is not required to make its website and mobile app accessible where 

alternative accessible options are provided.

EIGHTH DEFENSE

113. White Castle’s website and mobile app were usable and accessible despite their 

alleged noncompliance, and/or any noncompliance was de minimis.

NINTH DEFENSE

114. Full compliance with the cited standards identified in the Complaint is technically 

infeasible.

TENTH DEFENSE

115. Content on White Castle’s website or mobile app is provided by a third party 

provider that White Castle does not control.

ELEVENTH DEFENSE

116. Plaintiff has sought remedies not available under Title III of the ADA or the 

UCRA.

TWELFTH DEFENSE

117. The UCRA does not apply to White Castle’s website or mobile app because 

White Castle does not engage in any direct sales of the goods or services Plaintiff alleges that she 

attempted to purchase to any person in California. 

THIRTEENTH DEFENSE

118. Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands, as Plaintiff is a 

serial plaintiff.

FOURTEENTH DEFENSE

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 13 of 15 PAGEID #: 50
14

119. White Castle reserves the right to amend and/or supplement these affirmative 

defenses as appropriate. 

WHEREFORE, White Castle respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in its 

favor and against Plaintiff on all claims, dismiss those claims with prejudice, award its 

reasonable costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fee incurred in having to respond to Plaintiff’s claims, 

and award it any other relief that this Court deems just and proper. 

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Jamie A. LaPlante

Jamie A. LaPlante, Trial Attorney 

(0082184)

Adam R. Bennett (0095565)

Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur LLP

41 S. High Street, Suite 3000 

Columbus, OH 43215-6194 

Phone: (614) 227-2085

Fax: (614) 227-2100 

Email: jlaplante@porterwright.com

Email: abennett@porterwright.com

Attorneys for Defendant White Castle 

Management Company

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 14 of 15 PAGEID #: 51
15

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, on November 10, 2017, a copy of the foregoing was filed with the Clerk 

of Court using the CM/ECF system. Notice of filing will be performed by the Court’s electronic filing 

system, and parties may access the documents through the electronic filing system.

/s/ Jamie A. LaPlante

Jamie A. LaPlante

DMS/10638697v.1

Case: 2:17-cv-00841-EAS-CMV Doc #: 6 Filed: 11/10/17 Page: 15 of 15 PAGEID #: 52