2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

8-19-2008 

# D i s a bled Ac t ion P

A v . S EP T A

P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 06-5109

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin
. C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du

. Re c omme nde d C it at ion

" Di s a b le d Act ion P

A v . S EP T A" (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 586. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/586P RE CE DE NT I AL
UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

N o. 06- 5109

DI S AB L E D I N AC T I ON OF P E NNS YL VANI A,

A ppel l ant

v. S OUT HE AS T E RN P E NNS YL VANI A T RA NS P OR T AT I ON AU THO RI TY

O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D

. C

. N o. 03- cv- 01577) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e G ene E. K

. Pr at t er

A r gued J anuary10, 2008 B efor e: FI SH E R , H A R D I M A N and S T A P L E T O N , C i r cui tJudges

.2 ( Fi l ed: A ugus t19, 2008 )
St ephen F. G ol d ( A r gued) 125 Sout h 9t h St r eet Sui t e 700 Phi l adel phi a, PA 19107- 0000
R o c c o J. Ia c u llo M ark J

. M urphy D i s abi l i t i es L aw Pr oj ect 1 3 1 5 W a ln u t S tre e t Sui t e 400 P h i l a d e l p h i a , P A. A t t or neys f

orAppel l ant G r egoryB

. Fr i el ( A r gued) J es s i ca D

. Si l ver U ni t ed St at es D epart m entof J us t i ce C i vi l R i ght s D i vi s i on, A ppel l at e Sect i on P. O

. B ox 14403 B en Fr ankl i n St at i on W as hi ngt on, D C 20044- 4403 A t t or neys f

orA m i cus Appel l ant Saul H

. K r enze l ( A r gued) Saul H

. K r enze l & A s s oci at es 42 Sout h 15t h St r eet T he R obi ns on B ui l di ng, Sui t e 800 Phi l adel phi a, PA 19102- 0000 A t t or neys f

orAppel l ee3 OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

H A R D IM A N , C i r cui tJudge

. I n t hi s s t atut or y i nt erpr et at i on cas e, w e m us tdeci de w hen t he st atut e of l i m i t at i ons begi ns t o run i n a ca s e ar i s i ng undert he A m er i cans W i t h D i s abi l i t i es A ct ( A D A ) and the R ehabi l i t at i on Ac t( RA )

. Ap p e l l a n tDi s a b l e d i n Ac t i o n o f P e n n s y l v a n i a ( DI A) a r g u e s t h a tun de r t h e p l a i n l a n g u a g e o f t h e s t a tu t e , i t s c l a i ms a c c ru e d “ u p o n t h e c o mp l e t i o n ” o f a l t e r a t i o n s t o t wo P h i l adel phi a s ubw ays t at i ons . A ppel l ee Southeas t ern Penns y l vani a T ran sp o rt ati o n A u tho ri ty(S E P T A ) argues , and the D i s t r i ctC our thel d, t hatD I A ’ s cl ai m s acc rued pr i ort o t he compl et i on of the al t er at i ons w hen D I A di s cover ed thatt he planned al t erat i on s w ou l d n ot i nclude elevat ors. I.
W e v iew th e f

a c ts a n d d ra w a ll rea so n a b le in f e re n c e s in the l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o D I A , t he part yagai ns tw hom s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t w a s e n te re d

. Fees ers , I nc. v. Mi chael Foods , I nc. , 498 F. 3d 206, 208 ( 3d C i r . 2007) ( ci t i ng A n dre o li v. G at es , 4 8 2 F

. 3 d 6 4 1 , 6 4 4 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 7 )).4 D IA is a n o n p ro f

it c o rp o ra tio n th a t se e k s to e lim in a te di s cr i m i nat i on agai ns tdi s abl ed i ndi vi dual s i n al l as pect s of comm uni t yl i fe. T o achi eve thi s goal , D I A empl oy s a var i etyof me t h o d s i n c l u d i n g : g o v e r n me n tmo n i t o r i n g , p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i s m, d ire c t in v o lv e m e n t in m u n icip a l p lan n in g , an d , as a las t re so rt, l i t i gati on . M anyof D IA ’s app roxi m at el y45 0 m em bers use w heel chai r s and r el yon SE PT A fort hei r p u b l i c tr ans por t at i on need s. SE PT A is a n agenc yof the C om m onw eal t h of P e n n sy lv a n ia re sp o n sib le f o r p ro v id in g p u b lic tra n sp o rta tio n in S o u th e a ste rn P e n n sy lv a n ia. In P h ilad e lp h ia, S E P T A ’s C ity T r a n s i tD i v i s i o n o p e r a t e s a v a s t n e t w o r k o f s u b w a y a n d s u b w a yel evated rapi d rai l s, regi on al rai l s, l i gh t rai l s, t rackl ess trol l ey s, a n d b u s e s t h a tp r o v i d e o v e r8 5 0 , 0 0 0 p a s s e n g e rt r i p s p e rd a y. S E P T A recei ves f

e d e ral fun ding fo r m anyof it s act i vit i es, i ncl udi ng i t s r ece nt r emodel i ng of an e nt r ance t o t he 15th St r eet St at i on. A

. 15 th S treetStat i on an d C ou rt yard
T he bus t l i ng 15t h St reetSt at i on i s l ocat ed under gr ound near15t h and M arketSt r eet s in dow nt ow n Phi l adel phi a. Pas s enger s can a cce s s t he s t at i on i n t w o w ay s . Fi r s t , us i ng t he st ai rw a y a t th e southw estsi de o f 15 t h an d M arketS t reet s, p a ss e n g e rs c a n d e sc e n d d ire c tly to th e p latf o rm f o r th e M a rk e tFr ankfor d s ubw ayl i ne. Second, us i ng t he st ai r w ayores cal at or att he nor t hw es ts i de of the same bl ock, pas s enger s can de s cend to the “15t h St r eetC our t y ar d. ” Fr om t her e, t heycan tu rn nor t hw ar d t ow ar d t he Suburban R egi onal R ai l L i ne St at i on (S u b u rba n S tat ion ), o r sou thw ard , tow ard the M ark et-F ran k fo rdT h e p arti es d ispu te w h ethe r th e 1 5 th S tr ee t C o u rty ard 1 i s an “e nt r ance ” t o t he M arket -F ran kfor d St at i on ort o t he Suburban St at i on. A ccor di ng t o SE PT A , “i n or dert o r eac h t he 15 t h S t reet M arket -Frankfo rd S t at i on , an i nd i vidual ” m ustfi rs t ent er“the Suburban St at i on T r ans i tFaci l i t yatt he 15th St r eet C o u rty ard ” a n d then “trav el so u th in the 1 5 th S tr e et co rri d o r, exi tSuburban St at i on, and t r avel over under gr ound t r ans i tl i nes b e f o re e n te ri n g th e 1 5 th S tr e e t M a rk e t- F ra n k f o rd S ta tio n .” R egar dl es s w hetheri ti s t echni cal l yl abel ed an “ entr ance , ” the 15t h St r eetC our t y ar d undi s put edl ypr ovi des acc es s to the M arket -F ran k ford St at i on. A ccor di ngl y , att hi s s t age of t he l i t i gat i on, w e ac ceptD I A ’ s char act er i za ti o n of the 15th St r eet C ourty ar d as an “e nt r ance ” t o the M arket

- Fr ankfor d St at i on. Mic h a e l Fo o d

s , 498 F. 3d at208, 2 1 2

. T he D i s t r i ctC our tm ay t ake up th i s n u a n c e a n d d e t e r mi n e i t s r e l e v a n c e t o § 1 2 1 4 7( a) l i abi l i t yon r emand. 5 plat form

. S E P T A ’s renova t i on s t o this l at t er entrance gav e ri se t o t he pr es entdi s put e. 1
P ri o r t o S E P T A ’s ren o v ati o n s, the 15 th Street C o u rty ard i ncl uded a s etof s t ai r s an d tw o es cal at or s encl os ed w i t hi n a headhous e. O n Sept ember27, 199 9 , S E PT A r ece i ved a $700, 0 0 0 g ran t from the E conomi c D evel opm entA dm i ni s tr at i on of the U ni t ed St at es D epart m entof C om m er ce f ora pr oj ect ent i t l ed “Renovat i on of 15th and M arketSt r eet s H eadhous e at S u b u rb a n S tatio n .” A c c o rd in g to th e g ra n t, th e p rojec t w a s to in v o lv e “ v a rio u s re n o v a tio n s to th e 1 5 th a n d M a rk e t S tre e ts entr ance s and r el at ed ar eas ” i ncl udi ng “r enovat i on of entr ance s t o t he under gr ound t r ai n s t at i on concour s e; demol i t i on of6 exis t i ng faci l i t i es; t he co nst ructi on / i nst al l at i on of n ew st ai rs , lan d sc a p in g , li g h tin g , sig n a g e , fin is h e s, c a n o p ies ; an d a ll a p p u rt e n a n c e s .”
I n a c c e p t i n g t h e Comme r c e Dep a r t me n tf u n d i n g , SEP TA agreed to “pursue dil i gen t l yt he d evelopm en t o f t he P roj ectso a s to e n s u re c o m p le tio n . . . w ith in [ th e ] t im e s c h e d u le .” Speci fi cal l y , t he gr antr equi r ed SE PT A to b egi n cons t ruct i on w i t hi n 18 m ont hs of i t s r ece i pt of t he funds and t o l i m i tt he t ot al c o n stru c tio n p e rio d to 2 9 m o n th s. In a d d iti o n , the g ra n t w a s to e x p ir e “ f iv e (5 ) ye a rs f

ro m th e f is c a l yea r o f

th e G ra n t A w a rd ,” re q u irin g th a t th e p rojec t b e “ p h y s ic a llya n d f in a n c ially c o m p le te d b yS e p te m b e r 3 0 , 2 0 0 4 .”
H avi ng s ecur ed fundi ng, SE PT A ap pl i ed t o t he C i t yof Phi l adel phi a for a var i ance fr om cert ai n pr ovi s i ons of the Bui l d i n g Cod e . Am o n g t h e p r o v i s i o n s f r o m wh i ch SE PTA s oughta var i ance w as Sect i on B

- 1110. 2. 2( 9) , w hi ch r equi r es that “[ w ]he re b u il d ing en tr an ce s are alt ere d , o r w h en p lans are pr es ent ed t o r el ocat e and pr ovi de a new pr i m ary entr ance, the entr ance shal l be m ade accessi ble. ” F or ob viou s re a so ns, S E P T A ’s va ri an ce ap p li ca ti o n ca u g h t th e a tt en ti o n o f D IA ’s l egal couns el , St ephen F. G ol d.
Fear ful t hatSE PT A ’ s r enovat i ons w oul d not i ncl ude an e lev a to r, G o ld w r o te to E d w a rd M c L a u g h lin , C ity C om m i ssi on er fo r t he D epart m ent of L i censes and Inspect i on s. I n hi s l et t erof A ugus t3, 2000, G ol d expr es s ed conc ern “thatt he C ityw o u ld a llo w S E P T A to a p p lyf o r su c h a v a ria n c e o n its behal f fors uch a maj orpubl i c ac ces s poi nt

. ” G ol d i ns i s t ed that

“ [ i]n a d d iti o n to e n su rin g th a t re n o v a tio n s . . . a re c a rrie d o u t in7 compl i ance w i t h t he B ui l di ng C o d e, the C i t yal s o has an o b lig a tio n to e n su re th a t su c h re n o v a tio n s a re . . . ca rrie d o u t in c o mp l i a n c e wi t h t h e [ Am e r i c a n s Wi t h Di s a b i l i t i e s Ac t ]

. ” He a sk e d M c L a u g h lin to k e e p h im in f o rm e d “ a s to h o w th e C ity p la n s to p ro c e e d w ith [ S E P T A ’s ] v a ri a n c e re q u e s t.”
G ol d r ece i ved no r es pons e fr om M cLaughl i n and cons equent l ydi s cus s ed hi s conce r ns w it h Pet e W i nebr ake, an at t or neyi n t he C i t ySol i ci t or ’ s O ffi ce. G ol d s um m arized the di s cus s i on i n a l et t er dat ed S ept ember 28, 2000: “A s I s t at ed on t he phon e y es t er day , t hi s pr obl em shoul d be r es ol ved before cons t ruct i on comm ence s , ory ou l eave m e w it h v eryfew opt i ons. I am ver yconce r ned thatt he C i t y ’ s t r ai n has al r eady left th e stati o n a n d I m u st act soo n er tha n lat er [ sic ]

. I am a v a ila b le to m e e t w i t h y o u a t yo u r e a rl ie s t c o n v e n ie n c e .” (E m p h a s is in o ri g in a l.)
G ol d hear d not hi ng m or e fr om W i nebr ake, butr ece i ved a l et t er dat ed N ovember 14, 2000 fr om A s s i s t antC i t ySol i ci t or Fr edr i ck K

. Pas ourr egar di ng t he “15th St r eetC our t y ar d Por t i on o f th e S u b u rba n S tat ion P rojec t. ” In p er tine n t part, P aso u r’s l et t ers t at ed:
I re p re se n t th e C ity o f P h ilad e lp h ia w ith re sp e c t to t he above

- r efe r enced proj ect

. I under s t and that y ou bel i eve that t he A D A , i t s r egul at i ons and the A cce s s i bi l i t yG ui del i nes r equi r e an el evat ori n t he 15t h St r eetcour t y ar d. I al s o under s t and thaty ou ar e cons i der i ng br i ngi ng a l aw s ui tt o enj oi n t he 15t h St r eetcour t y ar d por t i on of t he pr oj ect i f the C i t yi s s ues a bui l di ng perm itbas ed on pl ans t hatI t i s uncl ear t o w hat bui l di ng perm i tthis st at ement 2 r efe r s a s t h e Ci t yd i d n o ti s s u e a p e r mi tf o rt h e 1 5 t h Str eet C our t y ar d pr oj ectunt i l m i d- February2001. A pp’ x 216. 8 do noti ncl ud e an el evat ori n t he 15th St r eet cour t y ar d.
T hi s l et t eri s t o advi s e y ou t hat the C i t ydoe [ sic ] n o t sh a re y o u r vie w th a t a n e lev a to r i s re q u ire d in t he 15th St r eet cour t y ar d and has i s s ued a bui l di ng perm i t for t he pr oj ect

. Pl eas e r emem bert hatt he 2 1 5 th S tre e t c o u rty a rd w ill b e re a d ilya c c e ss ib le to a n d u s a b l e b yi n d i v i d u a l s wi t h d i s a b i l i t i e s . As y ou a r e a war e , e l e v a t o r s a r e p l a n n e d f o ro t h er l ocat i ons neart he 15th St r eetcour t y ar d.
T he curr entbi ds fort he por t i on of the pr oj ectt hat inclu d es th e 1 5 th Street co u rty ard ren o v ati o n s are only g ood t hr ough D ece m ber30, 2000. I f, t her efor e, y ou pl an t o br i ng an ac t i on chal l engi ng th e 1 5 th S tre e t co u rty a rd p o rtio n o f th e p rojec t, p lease d o so in an ex p ed it iou s m an n er. I u n d e rsta n d th a t y o u h a d o n e m e e tin g w ith re p re se n tativ e s o f

th e C ity a n d S E P T A a t th e 1 5 th St r eetcour t y ar d t o di s cus s t he proj ect

. I bel i eve th a t an o th e r m e e tin g th is w e e k m a yb e u se f u l in o rd e r t o di scuss t he proj ect i n m ore detai l and to d e ter m in e if

w e c a n re a c h a n a g re e m e n t th a t is9 s at i s fac t or yt o y ou , the di s abl ed comm uni t y , t he Ci t ya n d S E P T A.
A pp’ x 477.
D es pi t e P asour’ s l et t er , G ol d di d noti m m edi at el yfi l e a l aw s ui t , and the C i t yissue d SE PT A a bui l di ng perm i ton or ab o u t Fe b rua ry1 4 , 2 0 0 1 , d esc ri b ing the 1 5 th S tr ee t C o u rty ard proj ectas fol l ow s: D em o lit ion inco rpo rates h ea d h o u se, st air, r ai l i ngs , l i m i t ed w al l , ven ee r , pavement , and li g h ti n g sy stem s. A lso to b e re m o v e d are pl ant ers, fount ai n and ce i l i ngs . C ons t ruct i on sc o p e c o n sis ts o f

g las s h e a d h o u se , sta ir, (2 ) re tail s pace s , r ai l i ngs , s t or efr onts y s . , pl ant er s , l i ght i ng and pavi ng i ns t al l ed, as w el l as new cei l i ng. A p p ’x 21 6

. S E P T A co m m en ce d co n stru cti o n a fe w d ay s lat er. T h e re co rd su g g e s ts sev era l exp lana ti o n s fo r D IA ’s d e c isio n n o t to f

ile s u it p rio r to th is ju n c tu r e . F irst, G o ld t es t i fi ed thati n 2000, he metw i t h r epr es ent at i ves of SE PT A and t he C i t y beca us e “t hey w er e re al l y anxi ous t o geta comm i t m ent f ro m [ h im ] th a t th e re w o u ld n o t b e a law su it reg a rd in g 1 5 th St ree t

. ” See al

s o A pp’ x 477 ( r efe r r i ng t o a meet i ng betw een G ol d and “r epr es ent at i ves of t he C i t y and S E PT A ” t o det erm i ne i f the part i es coul d “r eac h an agr eement ”)

. A ccor di ng t o G ol d, Fr ance s E gan, A s s i s t antt o SE PT A ’ s G eneral M anage rfor G o v e rn m e n t a n d P u b lic A f f a ir s , a n d D e b o ra h R u s s o , a r epr es ent at i ve of the C i t y , as s ur ed hi m t hati n l i eu of a n el evat orT h e C ity H a ll p roje c t is d is c u s s e d in P a rt I.B , i nfr a . 3 A l t hough t he par t i es s t i pul at ed D I A ’ s al l egat i ons of the 4 D I A

- SE PT A

- C i t yagr eementoutof the l i t i gat i o n , the s t i pul at i on o n l y p r e c l u d e s D I A “ f

r o m p r e s e n t i n g a n y c l a i m t hatD efe ndant S E P T A a lleg e d lya g re e d to c o n stru c t ele v a to rs a t C ityH a ll i n l i eu o f co n s t ruct i on of an e l evat oratt he nor t hw es tcornerof 15t h and M arketSt r eet s . ” A pp’ x 136 ( emphasi s added)

. H er e, D IA rai ses no “clai m ” based on the all eged agreem e n t. See D is abl ed i n A ct i on of

P a. v. Southeas t er n P a. Trans p. A uth. , N o. 03- C V -15 77, 2006 W L 3392733, at*16 ( E

. D

. Pa. N ov. 17, 2 0 0 6 ) (he reina fter D IA )

. R ather , D I A pr offe r s t he agr eementas an expl anat i on fori t s deci s i on not t o fi l e s ui tbefor e cons t ruct i on began on the 15th St r eetSt at i on entr ance . G ol d w as confi dent t hat he coul d r el yon t he as s ur ance s 5 of Egan an d R us s o beca us e of thei rl ong pr ofes s i onal r el at i ons hi p, and D I A E x ecut i ve D i r ect orN ancySal andr a w as c o n te n t to w a it a n d s e e if “ [ S E P T A ] w o u ld d o th e ri g h t th in g .” 10 a t 1 5 th S tre e t, S E P T A “ w o u ld p u t in th e e lev a to r a t C ityH a ll a n d b e g in c o n s tru c tio n in ‘0 2 w ith th e c o m p le tio n d a te o f ‘0 4 .” 3 See al s o A pp’ x 477 ( not i ng t hat “el evat or s ar e pl anned f orot her loca ti o n s n ea r th e 1 5 th S tr ee t cou rty ard ”).
G ol d di s cus s ed the pr opos ed com pr om i s e w i t h D I A , and D IA a g re e d th a t it w a s a c c e p tab le. G o ld in f o rm e d E g a n o f

h is c lien t’s a ss e n t, bu t n e ith e r p a rty m e m o ria lize d th e d e a l. 4 A ss u a g e d n o n e th e les s, D IA to o k n o f u rth e r a c tio n u n til la te 5T h e f o re g o in g a c c o u n t p a ra llels th e a lleg a tio n s in 6 D I A ’ s Second and T hi r d A m ended Com pl ai nt s w i t h one exce pt i on. T he C om p la i nt s s t at e thatt he negot i at i ons among G o ld , S E P T A , a n d th e C ity o c c u rre d “ [ i]n 2 0 0 0 w h ile th e 1 5 th and M arketSt r eetentr ance w as i n cons t ruct i on. ” A pp’ x 111, 1 1 9 . C o n stru c tio n o n th e e n tra n c e d id n o t co m m e n c e u n til February2001, how ever . A pp’ x 212 ( SE PT A ’ s C api t al Pr oj ect Pr ogr es s R epor tnot i ng t hata “ [ p] r e- cons tr uct i on m eet i ng” r egar ding t he “15th St r eetE nt r ance ” w as hel d on February5, 2001 ) ( emphase s added) ; A pp’ x 216. B eca us e w e mustr es ol ve s u c h f a c tu a l d i s c r e p a n c i e s i n t h e l i g h tmo s tf a v o r a b l e t o DI A, w e as s um e thatcons t ruct i on had notcomm enced w hen the al l eged deal among D I A , SE PT A , and the C i t yw as br oker ed. Mi chael Foods , 498 F. 3d at208, 212.

11 2002 w hen i tappea red t hatSE PT A w as noti ns t al l i ng an e lev a to r a t C ityH a ll. 6
G ol d’ s expl anat i on forD I A ’ s dec isi on nott o fi l e a pr ec o n stru c tio n law su it i s s u p p o rte d b y a S e ttl e m e n t A g re e m e n t in w hi ch D I A vol unt ar i l ydi s m i s s ed i t s cl ai m s agai ns tt he C i t y , and th e C itya f

f irm e d th a t it“ o n lyg ra n te d p e r m its f o r [ th e 1 5 th St r eetC our t y ar d] r enovat i on beca us e [i t ] bel i eved SEP T A had agr eed t o cons t ruct el evat or s i n the C i t yH al l C our t y ar d i n l i eu of the r equi r ed el evat orat15t h and M arket

. ”
A ltern a tiv e ly , the re c o rd su g g e sts th a t at s o m e p o in t, D I A ’ s str at egys hi ft ed fr om obt ai ni ng a pr e- cons t ruct i on i nj unct i on t o pur s ui ng pos t

- cons t ruct i on r emedi es bas ed on G ol d’ s bel ief t hateven though “[SEP T A ] had s t ar t edIn th e p a n th e o n o f m isu se d m e tap h o rs, “h o ist w ith h is 7 o wn p e t a r d ” m a yb e p r e e m i n e n t

. A “ p e t a r d ” i s a s m a l l b o mb us ed t o br eak dow n door s , butt he w o r d w as der i ved fr om t he M i ddl e Fr ench “ pet er , ” meani ng “t o br eak w ind. ” See W EB ST ER ’ S T HI R D N EW I N T E R N A T IO N A L D I C TI ON ARY 1689 ( 1993)

. I ti s no w onder t he w or d found fa vorw i t h t he mast erof th e d o u b le e n te n d re . See W I L L I AM S HAKESPEARE , H AML ET , A ct III, S c e n e 4 (“ F o r ‘tis th e sp o rt to h a v e th e e n g in e r / H o ist w ith h is ow n p etard ”). 12 c o n s t ru c t i o n o re v e n c o mp l e t e d [ c o n s t ru c t i o n ] , ” t h e ADA e n a bled D IA t o fo rce SE P T A t o inst al l an elevat or. G old a d mi t t e d t h a th e g a v e Pa s o u r ’ s a d mon i t i o n t o f i l e s u i ti n an expedi t i ous m anner“[v] ery , very , very m uch cons i der at i on” but d e te rm in e d th a t h e c o u ld “ o p tim iz e re p re s e n tin g [ D IA ] [ b y] l et t i ng [SE PT A ] m ove th e stai r s and begi n[] t he cons t ruct i on b e c a u s e [ DI A] c o u l d a l wa y s g e tt h e e l e v a t o ra n d ma k e [ S E P T A] p u t it [in ] i f n ec essa ryalon g 1 5 th S tr ee t. ” F o r reaso n s tha t are notcl earfr om t he r ecor d, G ol d concl uded thati f cons tru cti on di d notpr ocee d, “ther e w oul d be no el evat or . ” A ccor di ngl y , he “d ec ided

. . . to l et [S E P T A an d the C ity ] si t i n their ow n p etard [ sic ].” 7
W hat evert he r eas ons forw ai t i ng, D I A fi l ed it s i ni t i al C om pl ai nton M ar ch 14, 20 0 3 , appr oxi m at el yei ghtm ont hs aft er t he new l yr enovat ed 15t h St r eet C our t y ar d entr ance w as opened on A ugus t8, 2002 w i t houtan el evat or . D I A r eq u es t ed

“ p e rm a n e n t in

ju n c tiv e re lief

to e n jo in [ S E P T A ] to b e g in cons t ruct i on i m m edi at el y of a[n] el evat or at t he 15th and M arketT h e p a rties d isp u te w h e th e r th is e sc a lat o r is a n e x it 8 fr om t he C i t yH al l St at i on pl at form or fr om t he C i t yH al l St at i on m ez za n ine, a c o n co u rse o n e lev el ab o v e the p lat fo rm . D IA as s er t s that t he es cal at or“s erves as an exi tforpatr ons di s embar ki ng fr om t he B r oad St r ee t Subw ayC i t yH al l St at i on and pedes t r i ans t r aver s i ng t he conc our s e. ” SE PT A admi t s t hat t he es cal at or“s erves as an exi tforpedes t r i ans t r aver s i ng t he co ncour s e” butdeni es t hati ti s “an e xi tforpatr ons d ise m b a rk ing f

ro m C ityH a ll S tatio n .” A p p a re n tly , the C ityH a ll C our t y ar d es cal at ordoes not ext end bey ond t he m ezz ani ne l evel so thatpas s enger s exi t i ng ont o t he C i tyH al l St at i on pl at form m u s t ta k e a n o ther e sca lat o r t o the m ez za n ine lev el, then b o ard th e C ityH a ll C o u rty a rd e sc a lato r to re a c h stre e t l e v e l. A t th is s t age o f the pr ocee di ngs , w e r ej ectSE PT A ’ s hyper - t echni cal defi ni t i on of “e xi t

. ” Mi chael Foods , 498 F. 3d at 208, 212. T he D istric t C o u rt m a yc o n sid e r th e re lev a n c e , if a n y , o f th is d isp u te on r emand. 13 S tre e t en tra n c e . . . to a ss u re a c c e ss f o r p e rso n s w ith d is a b iliti e s .”
B

. C i t

y H all Stat i on an d C ou rt

yard
T h e se co n d su b

ject of th e p rese n t dispu te i s S E P T A ’s r epl ace m entof an e s cal at ort hat c arr i ed pas s enger s fr om t he c o n c o u rse a b o v e th e C ityH a ll S tatio n p latf o rm to C ityH a ll C o u rty a rd

. L o c a ted n e a r th e 1 5 th S tre e t S tati o n , C ityH a ll

8 St at i o n i s o n e o f

t h e b u s i e s ts t o p s o n t h e Br o a d Str e e ts u bw ay l i n e and s erves as a tr ans ferpoi ntbetw een the B r oad St r eet L i ne, t he M arket

- Fr ankfor d L i ne, and R egi onal R ai l L i nes . For14 i ns t ance , fr om t he conc our s e b el ow C i t yH al l C our t y ar d, p a ss e n g e rs c a n a c c e ss th e 1 1 th a n d 1 3 th S tr e e t M a rk e tF rankfo rd L i ne p l at form s w i t ho ut usi ng st ai rs . T h e C ity H all C o u rty ard p rojec t w as p art of S E P T A ’s E s cal at orR epl ace m entPr ogr am, l aunche d i n 1999 t o i m pr ove t he s afe t y of esc al at or s t hr oughoutt he s y s t em. SE PT A i ncl uded fundi ng fort he pr ogr am i n i t s FY 20 0 1 C api t al B udgetaft er hol di ng a publ i c meet i ng t o di s cus s t he i m pr ov em en ts on M ay 22, 200 0

. A l t hough no r epr es ent at i ve of D I A at t ended the me e t i n g , DI A’ s E x e c u t i v e Di r e c t o rt e s t i f i e d t h a tDI A r e v i e ws SE PT A ’ s C api t al B udgeteac h y earand w as aw are of the p rojec t.
B yA ugus t17, 2001, SE PT A had barri caded the ar ea ar ound t he C i t yH al l C o u rt y ar d es cal at orand pos t ed s i gns t hat r ead “Pr oj ect of t he Penns y l vani a Publ i c T r ans por t at i on A s s i s t ance Fund; E s cal at orR e p l a c e me n tatE r i e, Spr i ng G ar den, C ityH a ll & 3 0 th S tre e t S tatio n s; S o u th e a ste rn P e n n sy lv a n ia T r ans por t at i on A ut hori t y . ” SE PT A r emoved t he exi s t i ng es cal at or , ext ended the w el l w ayand r el ocat ed the trus s upon w hi ch i ts at , and i ns t al l ed a ne w es cal at or . C ons t ruct i on w as compl et ed and the es cal at orw as opened t o the publ i c on or aboutA ugus t 24, 2003. T he fi ni s hed pr oj ect di d noti ncl ude an el evat or . O n February15, 2005, D I A fi l ed i t s Four t h A m ended C o m p lain t, ad d in g a lleg a tio n s re g a rd in g th is p rojec t. C

. The D is tr i ct

C our tP r ocee di ngs D I A fi l ed i t s i ni t i al C om pl ai nton M ar ch 14, 2003, al l egi ng t hatSE PT A ’ s r enovat i ons t o t he 15th St r eetSt at i on15 en t r ance vi ol at ed t he A D A and t he R A

. T he D i s t r i ctC o u rt di s m i s s ed t he compl ai ntbeca us e D I A fai l ed t o name t he C i t yof Phi l adel phi a, t he ow nerof the r eal pr oper t y u pon w hi ch the en tr an ce is l o ca ted, as a d ef en d an t. A fter the C o u rtg ran ted D IA re lief f ro m th e d ism iss a l, D IA a d d e d th e C ity a s a d e f e n d a n t in i t s Fi r s tA m ended Com pl ai nt

. O n O ct ober10, 2003, D I A fi l ed a Second A m ended Com pl ai nt , w hi c h i n c l u d e d a l l e g a t i o n s about a dea l betw een D I A , SE PT A , and the C i t y t o i ns t al l an el evat or att he C i t yH al l C our t y ar d i ns t ead of the 15th St r eetC our t y ar d.
A ft eran uns ucce s s ful set t l ementat t empt , D I A fi l ed a Th i r d Ame n d e d Co m p l a i n t , a d d i n g a n ADA “ k e ys t a t i o n ” c l a i m. See 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 2 1 4 7 (b ); 2 9 C .F .R

. § 3 7 .4 7

. S E P T A m o v e d to di s m i s s t he keys t ati o n cl ai m and ar gued thatpor t i ons of the T hi r d A m ended Com pl ai nts houl d be s t r i ck en p ur s uantt o a sti p u lat ion b etw ee n D IA an d S E P T A

. T h e D istri ct C o u rt r efus ed t o di s m i s s t he key s t at i on cl ai m , butD I A agr eed t o s t r i ke i t s al l egat i ons that S E P T A had agr eed t o i ns t al l an el evat orat C ityH a ll i n lieu o f

1 5 th S tre e t. O n A u g u st16, 2004, D I A r eac hed a s et t l ement ag ree m en t w ith the C ity . T h ere in, the C itysti p u lat ed that “[ i] t i s t he C i t y ’ s l egal opi ni on t hatSE PT A i s l egal l yobl i gat ed under t he A D A and ac company i ng R egul at i ons t o co n st ructan el evat o ra tth e 15th and M arketSt r eetC our t y ar d entr ance , w hi ch S E P T A r e n o v a ted .” M o re o v e r, th e C itya ss e rte d th a t it“ o n ly g ra n ted p e rm its f

o r [ th e 1 5 th S tre e t] r e n o v a tio n b e c a u se [ it] b e liev e d S E P T A h a d a g re e d to c o n stru c t ele v a to rs in th e C ity H all C o u rty ard

. ” B ase d o n this ag ree m en t, the D istri ct C o u rt di s m i s s ed the C i t yfr om t he ca s e.B eca us e t he D i s t r i ct C our t di s m i s s ed D I A ’ s § 12147( a) 9 cl ai m s as barr ed byt he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons , i tdi d notr eac h t he vi gor ous l y di s put ed ques t i on of w hetherSE PT A ’ s r enovat i ons c o n s t i tu t e d “ a l t e r a t i o n s ” w i t h i n t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e A D A

. We l eave t hi s ques t i on fort he D i s t r i ctC our ton r emand. 16 O n Februa ry15, 2005, D I A fi l ed a Four t h A m ended C om pl ai nti n w hi ch i tadded a s econd cl ai m under§ 12147( a) b ase d o n S E P T A ’s ren o v ati o n s to the C ity H all C o u rty ard

. D IA al l eged thatSE PT A ’ s r enovat i ons t o bot h t he 15th St r eetand C i t yH al l C our t y ar ds cons t i tut ed “a l t er at i ons ” thatt r i gger ed A D A an d R A ac ce ssibil ityo b li g ati o n s. 4 2 U

. S

. C

. § 1 2 1 4 7 (a); 9 29 U

. S. C

. § 794( a)

. D I A al s o al l eged thatbot h 15t h St r eetand C i t y H al l ar e “key s t at i ons ” t hatSE PT A m us tm ake a cce s s i bl e. 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 2 1 4 7 (b ); 2 9 U .S .C

. § 7 9 4 (a ). D IA re q u e s te d , i nt er a lia , an i nj unct i on compel l i ng SE PT A t o cons t ructel evat or s at b o t h l ocat i ons . A ft ercompl et i ng di s covery , t he part i es fi l ed c ro ss m o tio n s f

o r su m m a ryju d g m e n t.
T h e D istri ct C o u rtg ran ted S E P T A ’ s m ot i on forsu m m ary j udgm enton al l count s . A s t o D I A ’ s § 12147( a) c l ai m s , t he cour tr eas oned that“[t ] o det erm i n e t he ac crual dat e of a di s cr i m i nat i on cl ai m , a court m u stfocus on w hen the di s cr i mi n a t o r ya c to c c u r r e d , n o twhe n t h e e f f e c to f t h a ta ct b ec am e pai nful

. ” D IA , 2006 W L 3392733, at*14 ( ci t i ng C har don v. Fer nandez , 454 U

. S. 6, 8 ( 1981) )

. T he D i s t r i ct C o u rtrejected D IA ’s arg u m en t th at S E P T A ’s disc ri m in atory a c ts o c c u rre d “ u p o n c o m p letio n o f [ th e ] a ltera tio n s” to th e 1 5 th S tr e e t a n d C ity H a ll C o u rt y a rd s . Id

. a t* 1 3 ( c i t i ng 42 U. S

. C. § 1 2 1 4 7 ( a ) )

. Ra t he r , t h e Di s t r i c tCo u r th e l d t h a tt h e c l a i msT he D i s t r i ct C our tal s o di s m i s s ed D I A ’ s “keys t at i on” 10 cl ai m s , hol di ng t hat § 12147( b) does not cr eat e a pr i vat e r i ghtof act i on byw hi ch i ndi vi dual s m ayenfor ce D ep art m entof T r ans por t at i on r egul at i ons des ign ati ng “keys t at i ons . ” Id

. at * 2 9 . T h is d e c isio n is n o t ch a llen g e d o n a p p e a l. B eca us e t he pr ocedur es , r i ght s , and r emedi es pr ovi ded 11 bySect i on 227 of the A D A ar e i dent i cal to thos e pr ovi ded by S e c tio n 5 0 4 o f

th e R A , s ee 4 2 U

. S .C

. § § 1 2 1 3 3 an d 1 2 1 4 7 (a),

17 ac cru ed w h en D IA k n ew , o r ha d rea so n to k n o w , that S E P T A ’s r enovat i ons w oul d not inc l ude el evat or s . A ccor di ng t o t he D istric t C o u rt, D IA h a d su c h k n o w led g e re g a rd in g th e 1 5 th S tr ee t C o u rty ard “n o lat er tha n N o v em b er 1 , 2 0 0 0 , w h en D IA w as i nform ed t hat SE PT A w oul d pr ocee d w i t h t h e p lanned cons t ruct i on att he 15t h an d M arketSt r eetC our t y ar d w i t hout i ns t al li n g an el evat or , ” id . at * 1 4 , an d re g a rd in g th e C ityH a ll C our t y ar d, “atl eas tas ear l yas A ugus t17, 2001, ” w hen a s i gn w as pos t ed “i n t he C i t yH al l C our t y ar d on t he out s i de of the boar d e d

- o f

f c o n s t ru c t i o n a r e a whe r e t h e e s c a l a t o rwas b ei ng r epl ace d. ” Id

. a t * 1 7

. Be c a u s e DI A f i l e d i t s § 1 2 1 4 7 ( a ) c l a i ms m o re tha n tw o y ea rs af ter th ese d ate s , the D istri ct C o u rt d is m is s e d th e m a s b a rr e d b yth e s ta tu e o f lim ita tio n s , id

. , and D I A appea l ed. 10
II.
D I A ’ s cl ai m s ar i s e underSect i on 227 o f the A D A , 42 U. S

. C. § 1 2 1 4 7 ( a ) , a n d Sec t i o n 5 0 4 o f t h e RA, 2 9 U. S

. C. § 7 9 4 ( a )

. Th e Di s t r i c tCo u r th a d j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e rt h e s e c l a i ms

11w e w i l l gener al l y r efe ronl yt o the A D A w i t h t he under s t andi ng t hatbot h t he A D A and the R A ar e i m p li ca te d. See D oe v. C ou nty o f C entr e , 2 4 2 F .3 d 4 3 7 , 4 4 6 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 1 ); see al so McD onald v. C o m m w
. o f P a. , 62 F. 3d 92, 95 ( 3d C i r . 1995) ( “W hethers ui ti s fi l ed under t he R ehabi l i t at i on A ct orundert he [A m er i cans W i t h] D i s abi l i t i es A ct , t he s ubs t ant i ve s t andar ds for d eterm ining li ab il ityare the s am e.”).

18 pur s uantt o 28 U

. S. C

. §§ 1331 and 1343. W e r evi ew t he D i s t r i ct Cou r t ’ s f

i n a l o r d e rg r a n t i n g s u mma r yj u d g me n tt o SEP TA pur s uantt o 28 U

. S. C

. § 1291.
O urr evi ew i s pl enary , and w e appl yt he s ame st andar d as th e D is tr ic t C o u rt

. Mi c h a e lFo ods , 4 9 8 F .3 d a t 2 1 2 . W e w ill affirm t he g rantof sum m ary judg m ent i f “t he p l eadings, depos i t i ons , ans w er s t o i nt err ogat or i es , and admi s s i ons on fi l e, t ogetherw i t h t he af

fi davi t s , i f any , s how t hatt her e i s no genui ne iss u e as t o any m at eri al fact ” and t hat S E P T A i s “enti t led to j udgm entas a m at t er of l aw . ” F ED
. R. C IV
. P. 56( c)

. I n m aki ng t his determ i nati on , w e “view t he fact s i n the li g h t m ost fa v o rab le” to D IA an d “d raw a ll inf ere n ce s” in D IA ’s fa v o r. Mi chael Foods , 498 F. 3d at212 ( quot i ng Farrel lv. P l an t ers Li f es aver s C o. , 2 0 6 F

. 3 d 2 7 1 , 2 7 8 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 0 )).
In 1 9 7 3 , C o n g ress p asse d the R eh ab il it ati o n A ct t o as s u re th a t n o indi vidual w i t h a d i sabi l i t y“shal l

. . . be subj ect ed to di s cr i m i nat i on underanypr ogr am oract i vi t yr ece i vi ng Feder al fin an cial assist a n c e.” 2 9 U

. S

. C

. § 7 9 4 (a). S ev en teen y ea rs late r, C o n g re ss e x ten d e d th is m a n d a te to c o v e r a ll p u b lic19 tra n sp o rt a tio n p ro v id e rs in T itl e II o f th e A m e ric a n s W ith D is a b iliti e s A c t. See 4 2 U .S .C

. § § 1 2 1 3 2 a n d 1 2 1 3 1 (1 ). T itl e I I begi ns w i t h a g ener al pr ohi bi t i on of di s abi l i t y - bas ed di s cr i m i nat i on, § 12132, fol l ow ed bys even pr ovi s i ons t hat defi ne w hat“s hal l be consi d ered di s cr i m i nat i on” forpurpos es of the st at ut e. 42 U

. S. C

. §§ 12142, 12143, 12144, 12146, 12147, 12148, and 12162. I n t hi s cas e, w e addr es s an i m por t ant qu est i on of f

i rs ti m press i on regar ding on e of these provis i on s: w hen does a cl ai m under§ 12147( a) acc rue?
III

. Ne i t h e rTi t l e I I of t h e ADA n o rS e c t i o n 5 0 4 o f t h e RA inclu d es a n ex p ress statute o f li m it ati o n s. A s b o th st atutes w ere e n a c ted p rio r to th e e f

f e c tiv e d a te o f

th e d e f a u lt fo u r-y e a r sta tu te o f li m it ati o n s fo r fe d era l st atu te s , s ee 2 8 U. S

. C. § 1 6 5 8 , we bor r ow t he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons of the mostanal ogous s t at e l aw c a u s e o f a c tio n . N

or th Star S t eel

C o. v. Thom as , 515 U

. S. 29, 33 -34 (1 9 9 5 ); W

ilso n v . G a rc ia , 4 7 1 U

. S

. 2 6 1 , 2 6 6 -67 (19 8 5 ). T he D i s t r i ctC our tconcl uded, and t he par t i es do notdi s put e, t hat P en n sy lvan ia ’s tw o -ye a r s ta tu te o f lim ita tio n s fo r pe rson al i n jury claim s sh o u ld ap p lyto claim s u n d er § 1 2 1 4 7 (a).
T hi s concl us i on i s cons i s t entw i t h ourpr ece dent regar ding t he st atute of

l i m i t at i on s for federal ci vil ri gh t s cl ai m s. S e e , e .g ., L a ke v . A rn o ld , 2 3 2 F .3 d 3 6 0 , 3 6 8 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 0 ); Kost v. Koz aki ew i cz , 1 F

. 3 d 1 7 6 , 1 9 0 (3d C ir

. 1 9 9 3 ); B ougherv. U ni v. o f P it t s bur gh , 88 2 F

. 2d 74 , 78 (3d C i r. 19 89 ). Iti s al so cons i s t ent w it h t he maj or i t yof C our t s of A ppeal s t hathave d e c id e d t h e q u e s tio n . S e e G a o n a v . T o w n & C o u n try C re d it , 3 2 4 F .3 d 1 0 5 0 , 1 0 5 5 (8 th C ir. 2 0 0 3 ) (n o tin g th a t “m o st C o u rts20 of A ppeal [s ]

. . . have a ppl i ed the s t at e s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons for per s onal i nj ur yact i ons t o claim s undert he R ehabi l i t at i on A ct a n d th e A D A ” ); E v e re tt v. C o b b C o u n ty S c h . D ist. , 138 F. 3d 1 4 0 7 , 1 4 0 9 -1 0 (1 1 th C ir. 1 9 9 8 ); S o ig n ier v . A m . B d . o f P la stic Su rgery , 9 2 F .3 d 5 4 7 , 5 5 1 (7 th C ir. 1 9 9 6 ); Ba ke rv
. Bd

. of R eg e n ts , 9 9 1 F .2 d 6 2 8 , 6 3 2 (1 0 th C ir. 1 9 9 3 ); Mors e v. U ni v. of V er m ont , 9 7 3 F .2 d 1 2 2 , 1 2 7 ( 2 d C ir. 1 9 9 2 ); Hi cke y v. I r vi ng In d e p . Sc h . D ist. , 9 7 6 F

. 2 d 9 8 0 , 9 8 3 (5th C ir

. 1 9 9 2 ); cf

. W ol s ky v. Med. C oll

. of H

am pton R ds. , 1 F

. 3 d 2 2 2 , 2 2 3 -25 (4th C ir

. 1 9 9 3 ).
A ccor di ngl y , w e hol d thatt he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons appl i cabl e t o cl ai m s under T i t l e I I of the A D A and Sect i on 504 of the R A i s t he st atut e of l i m i t at i ons forper s onal i nj ur yact i ons i n t he s t at e i n w h ich the tr i al cour ts i t s . I n t hi s cas e, t he appl i cabl e s t atut e i s 42 P A
. C ON S
. S TAT
. § 5 5 2 4 , w hi ch prescr i bes a t w o-y ear s t atute of l i m i t at i on s. I V.
T h e m o re d if

f icu lt q u e stio n — a n d th e c ru x o f th e d isp u te betw een D I A and SE PT A — i s w hen thi s t w o y ears t atut e of lim itatio n s b e g in s to ru n . I n a n sw e rin g th is q u e stio n , w e n o te th a t “ [ t]h e A D A is a rem e d ial sta tu te, de sig n e d to e lim in a te di s cr i m i nat i on agai ns t t he di s abl ed i n al l fac et s of s oci ety , ” and a s s u c h , “it m u st b e b ro a d lyc o n stru e d to e f f e c tu a te its purpos es . ” K in n e

y v . Y e ru sa lim , 8 1 2 F

. S u p p . 5 4 7 , 5 5 1 ( E

. D. Pa. 1993) ( ci t i ng Tcher epni n v. Kn ight , 389 U

. S. 332, 335 (1 9 6 7 )) , a

ff’d , 9 F

. 3 d 1 0 6 7 (3d C ir

. 1 9 9 3 ).

A.T h e S u p rem e C o u rth as n o t ado p ted the “ d isco v ery 12 a c c ru a l ru le ” a s i t s o w n , An dr e ws , 534 U

. S. at27 ( i nt ernal ci t at i on om i t t ed) , and J us t i ce Sca l i a has cr i t i ci zed the rul e as “bad w i ne of r ece nt vi nt age. ” Id

. at 3 7 (S ca li a, J., co n cu rri n g ). 21 O r di nar i l y , a s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons begi ns t o run fr om t he m om ent the po t enti al plai nti ff h as a “com plet e and presentcause o f a c tio n .” B ay A rea L au ndry & D ry C l ean i ngP ensi on T rust Fund v. Fer berC or

p. , 522 U

. S

. 192, 195 ( 1997) ( quot i ng R aw l i ngs v. R ay , 3 1 2 U .S . 9 6 , 9 8 (1 9 4 1 )); A rn o ld , 232 F. 3d at 366 ( quot i ng R os s v. Johns

- M anvi l l e C or

p. , 766 F. 2d 823, 826 ( 3 d Ci r . 1 9 8 5 ) ) ( l i mi t a t i o n s p e r i o d b e g i n s t o ru n “ f r o m th e t i me t he ca us e of act i on acc rue[s ] ”)

. For fede r al caus es of act i on, t he a c c ru a l d a t e i s a ma t t e ro f f e d e r a l l a w. R o m e r o v . A llsta te C or p. , 4 0 4 F

. 3 d 2 1 2 , 2 2 1 (3d C ir

. 2 0 0 5 ).
W her e C ong r es s has s peci fi ed an a ccrual dat e by “expl i ci tcomm and” o r “ b yi m pl i cat i on fr om t he s t ructur e and te x t o f th e s ta tu te , ” w e d e f

e r t o its d ir e c tiv e . TR W I nc. v. An dr e ws , 5 3 4 U .S . 1 9 , 2 7 -2 8 (2 0 0 1 ); see R om ero , 4 0 4 F. 3d at 2 2 2 . “ [ I] n th e a b s e n c e o f a c o n tr a ry d ir e c tiv e f ro m C o n g re s s ,” w e a p p lyth e “ f

e d e ra l d isc o v e ryru le,” w h ich d icta te s th a t a fede r al caus e of a ct i on acc rues “w hen t he pl ai nt i ff di s cover s , or wi t h d u e d i l i g e n c e s h o u l d h a v e d i s c o v e r e d , t h e i n j u r yt h a tf

o r ms t he bas i s forthe clai m . ” R om ero , 404 F. 3d at222 ( i nt ernal q u o tat ion an d cit ati o n s o m itted). 12
W e agr ee w it h t he part i es thatC ongr es s di d not “expl i ci t l ycomm and” an acc rual dat e for§ 12147( a) cl ai m s as it h a s d o n e f

o r o th e r c iv il r ig h ts a c tio n s . Cf

. 4 2 U

. S. C

. 2000e-22 5( e) ( 1) ( “A char ge undert hi s s ect i on s hal l be fil ed w i t hi n one hundr ed and ei ght y day s aft er t he al l eged unl aw ful empl oym ent p ra c tice o c c u rre d

. . . . ” ); id

. § 3613 ( “A n aggr i eved pe r s on m ay comm ence a ci vi l act i on . . . notlat ert han 2 y ear s aft ert he o cc u r r ence ort he t erm i nat i on of an a l l eged di s cr i m i nat ory hous i ng pr act i ce . . . . ”)

. N evert hel es s , for t he r eas o n s tha t f o llo w , w e h o ld th a t th e “ s tru c tu re a n d t e x t o f th e s ta tu te ,” An dr e ws , 5 3 4 U. S

. a t2 8 , e v i n c e Co n g r e s s ’ s i n t e n t i o n t h a tc l a i ms u n d e r § 1 2 1 4 7 (a ) a c c ru e “ u p o n t h e c o m p le tio n o f

. . . al t erat i on s” t o p ub l i c t ransport at i on faci l i t i es. 1.
T he p ort i on of § 12 14 7(a) ati ssue i n this app eal provides:
W ith re sp e c t to a ltera tio n s o f a n e x is tin g f

a c ili ty orpar tt her eof us ed i n t he pr ovi s i on of des i gnat ed p u b lic tra n sp o rta tio n se rv ice s th a t a f f e c t o r c o u ld aff ectt he us abi l i t yof the fa ci l i t yorpar tt her eof, i ts hal l be cons i der ed di s cr i m i nat i on, forpurpos es of s ect i on 12132 of th is ti t l e and s ect i on 794 of Ti t l e 2 9 , f

o r a p u b l i c e n t i t y t o f

a i l t o m ake s uch alt era ti o n s (or to e n su re tha t th e a lt era ti o n s are m ade) i n s uch a mannert hat , t o t he maxi m um e x ten t f e a sib le, th e a ltere d p o rtio n s o f th e f a c ili ty a re re a d ilya c c e ss ib le to a n d u sa b le b yin d iv id u a ls w i t h d i sabi l i t i es, i ncludi ng i nd i vidual s w ho use w heel chai r s , upon t he compl et i on of s uch al t erat i on s.T he “rul e of the l as tant ece dent ” i s a p ri n ciple of 13 st atutory i nterpret at i on un der w hich “a l i m i t i ng cl ause or ph ras e

. . . s houl d or di nar i l ybe r ead a s m odi fy i ng onl yt he noun or p h ra se th a t it i m m edi at el y f o l l o ws. ” B ar nhar tv. Thom as , 540 U .S . 2 0 , 2 6 (2 0 0 3 ) (e m p h a sis a d d e d ). T h is r u le d o e s n o t h e lp SE PT A beca us e t he s t atut or yp hr as e i m m edi at el y pr ece di ng “upon the compl et i on of s uch al t er at i ons ” i s “i ncl udi ng in d iv id u a ls w h o u se w h e e lch a irs.” T o b e p re c ise , S E P T A is ar gui ng fora rul e of the se c o n d-to -la st an tece d en t — a fa r m o re 23 A s th e D istric t C o u rt c o rre c tlyo b se rv e d , the d isp u te betw een D I A and SE PT A “emanat es fr om t he di ffe r ence i n how t he part i es i n terpret ” thi s pr ovi s i on “as t o w hen the al l eged di s cr i m i nat i on occur s . ” D IA , 2006 W L 3392733, at*11. L i ke the p a rt ies an d the D istri ct C o u rt , w e b eli ev e § 1 2 1 4 7 (a)’s con cl ud i ng ph ras e — “up on t he com plet i on of suc h alt erat i on s”

— i s of funda m ent al i m por t ance i n ans w er i ng t hi s ques t i on. D I A ar gues t hat t he phra s e m odi fi es t he ent i r e def i ni t i on o f w h a t “s h a ll b e c o n sid e re d d isc rim in a tio n ” b e c a u se “ o n ly w h e n . . . alte ra tio n s a re c o m p lete d a n d th e in a c c e ss ib le f a c ili ty is re -o p e n e d w ill p e o p le w ith m o b ili tyd isa b ili ties b e su b jec t to di s cr i m inat i on. ” Ther efor e, D I A concl udes , cl ai m s under § 12147( a) do notacc rue unt i l al t er at i ons ar e compl et ed.
SE PT A i nvokes t he rul e of the l as tant ece dent , argui ng t hat the “u po n the com plet i on ” ph ras e on l y m od i fi es the p hrase “the al t er ed port i ons of t he faci l i t y ar e re adi l y acc es s i bl e t o and u sab le b yind ividu als w ith d isab il it ies” a n d n o t “th e e n ti re d e f in iti o n o f w h a t c o n stitu tes d isc rim in a tio n .” U n d e r th is 13as pi r at i onal pr opos i t i on. 24 i nt erpr et at i on, w hi ch the D i s t r i ct C our t adopt ed, t he func t i on of t he “upon t he compl et i on” phr as e i s “mer el y[t o] s ugges tt hat a c c e s s i b i l i t y f

o r d i s a b l e d i n d i v i d u a l s mu s t b e i n p l a c e a tt h e t i me t he al t er at i ons ar e compl et ed. ” D IA , 2006 W L 3392733, at*13. In o th e r w o rd s, th e p h ra se m e re ly a c k n o w led g e s tha t w h ile r enovat i ons ar e in p r ogr es s , fac i l i t i es w i l l nece s s ar i l ybe in a c c e ss ib le to e v e ry o n e , inc lu d in g “ in d iv id u a ls w ith di s abi l i t i es , ” and thatt hi s t empora r yi nacc es s i bi l i t yi s notw hat § 1 21 47 (a) prohibi t s. O u r e v a lu a tio n o f

th e se c o n f

lictin g in terp re tatio n s is g u ided b yfa m il iar rules o f statuto ryco n stru cti o n . O u r prim ary c o n c e rn is t o g iv e e f

f e c t to C o n g re ss ’s in ten t. Ro s e n b e r gv
. XM V ent ur es , 274 F. 3d 137, 141 ( 3d C i r . 2 001)

. W e as s um e that “C ongr es s expr es s es i t s i nt ent t hr ough t he ordi narym eani ng of i t s l anguage ” and ther efor e begin “w i t h an exa m i nat i on of the pl ai n l anguage o f t he s t atut e. ” Id . If th e lan g u a g e is u n a m b ig u o u s , o u r i n q u ir yis a t a n e n d

. Id

. A st atutoryprovis i on i s not am biguou s si m plybecau se “byi t sel f, [i t i s] suscept i ble t o differ i ng con struct i on s” becau se i n addit ion t o t he “s t atut or yl anguage . . . i t s el f, ” w e t ake acc ountof “the s peci fi c cont exti n w hi ch that l anguage i s us ed, and t he br oader cont ext of t he s t atut e as a w hol e. ” I n r e Pri ce , 370 F. 3d 362, 369 ( 3d C i r . 2004)

. W e as s um e, forexampl e, t hat everyw or d i n a s t atut e has m eani ng and avoi d i nt erpr et i ng one p a rt o f a statu te i n a m an n er tha t r en d ers a n o ther p art s u p e rf lu o u s . R osenb erg , 274 F. 3d at141- 42. W e al s o cons i der25 th e o v e r a l l “ o b

je c t a n d p o lic y ” o f

th e s ta tu te , U

ni t ed Stat es v. Schnei der , 1 4 F .3 d 8 7 6 , 8 7 9 (3 d C ir. 1 9 9 4 ), an d a v o id co n stru cti o n s tha t pro d u ce “o d d ” o r “a b su rd re su lt s” o r th at are

“ in c o n s is te n t w ith c o m m o n s e n s e .” See Publ i c C i t iz en v. U

. S. D ept

. of Jus t i ce , 491 U

. S. 440, 454 ( 1989) ( i nt ernal quot at i ons om i t t ed) ; 2A N. S ING ER , S UTH ER L AN D S TAT UTE S AN D S TAT UTO RY C ON ST RUC TI ON § 45: 12, at92 ( 6t h ed. 2000) (he reina fter S UTH ER L AN D ).
A p p ly ing thes e p ri n ciples to § 1 2 1 4 7 (a), w e f ind D IA ’s interpre tat ion o f th e “ u p o n the c o m p let ion ” p h rase m o re per s uas i ve. T he l anguage appea r s i n t he “s peci fi c cont ext ” of a s i ngl e s ent ence t hatdefi nes act i vi t i es t hat “s hal l be cons i der ed di s cr i m i nat i on”; and i n t he “br oadercont ext ” of Ti t l e I I , w hi ch a ss u re s th a t n o “ in d iv id u a l w ith a d isa b ili ty ” is “ su b jec ted to di s cr i m i nat i on. ” 42 U

. S. C

. §§ 12147( a) and 12132. “D i s cr i m i nat i on , ” as i ti s or di nar i l ydefi ned, i s t he deni al of “pr i v il eg es t o a ce r t ai n cl as s beca us e of r ace , age, s ex, nat i onal i t y , r el i gi on, orhandi cap. ” B L ACK ’ S L AW D I CTI ONARY 5 0 0 (8th ed

. 2 0 0 4 ). T h e p ri v il eg es a t s ta k e in § 1 2 1 4 7 (a) are a c c e ss to , an d u se o f

, p u b li c tra n sp o rta tio n f a c ili ties . It i s d if f icu lt t o u n d e rsta n d h o w th e s e p riv ileg e s a re d e n ied to i ndi vi dual s w i t h d isa bi l i t i es byt he mer e pr om ul gat i on or a p p ro v a l o f

re n o v a tio n p lan s th a t d o n o t in c lu d e a c c e s s ib ili ty fea tur es . I ns t ead, as C ongr ess r ecogni zed, i ti s onl yw hen re n o v a tio n s a re c o m p lete d th a t in d iv id u a ls w ith d isa b ili ties w ill b e e x c lu d e d f

ro m a c c e ss in g a n d u s in g su c h f a c ili ties w h ile o th e rs w il l n o t. T h is is th e tim e a t w h ich d isa b led in d iv id u a ls ar e s ubj ect ed t o t he di s parat e t r eatm entt hat§ 12147( a) w as e n a c ted to p re v e n t.26 SE PT A ’ s ar gu m entt hatt he “upon the compl et i on” l anguage m er el ycl ar i fi es t hat § 12147( a) i m pos es no dut yupon pub l i c e n t i t i e s t o e n s u r e a c c e s s i b i l i t ywhi l e t r a n s p o r t a t i on fac i l i ti es ar e undercons t ruct i on i s s peci ous . W e ar e conf i dent t hatC o n gr es s w oul d nothave f el tcompel l ed t o m ake s uch an o b v io u s c la ri f

ic a tio n . S ee P u bl i c C i t iz en , 491 U

. S. at454. Faced w i t h a choi ce bet w ee n SE PT A ’ s i nt erpr et at i on, w hi ch esse n ti all yren d ers the p h rase su rplu sag e, an d D IA ’s i nt erpretat i on, w hi ch gi ves i ts ubs t ant i al eff ect , w e choos e the la tte r. S e e S i lv e r man v
. Ea s tr i c h Mu l t i p l e I n v e s t o rFu n d

, L. P. , 51 F

. 3d 28 , 31 (3d C i r. 19 95 ) (A st atute “shou l d be con strued so t hateff ecti s gi ven t o al l i t s pr ovi s i ons , s o t hatno partw i l l be ino p era ti v e o r s u p e rf lu o u s , v o id o r i n s ig n if ic an t. ”); S UTH ER L AN D § 4 5:12, at94 (“[A ] constru c ti on t hat r end ers a por t i on of the s t atut e meani ngl es s s houl d notbe r eac hed byt he c o u rt u n les s th a t c o n stru c tio n is u n a v o id a b le.” ); S UTH ER L AN D § 46: 06, at190- 92 ( “N o cl aus e[, ] s ent ence [, ] orw or d sh all be cons t rued as s uper fl uous , voi d orinsign i fi canti f the cons t ru cti o n ca n b e found w hi ch w i l l gi ve for ce t o . . . al l t he w o rds o f th e statute.”).
W e t h u s i n t e rp r e t t h e “ u p o n t h e c o mpl e t i o n ” c l a u s e as m odi fy i ng t he s t atut or ydefi ni t i on of di s cr i m i nat ion such that cl ai m s under§ 12147( a) ar i s e “upon the compl et i on” of in a c c e s s ib le “ a lte ra tio n s .”
2.
O uri nt erpr et at i on of thi s s emi nal cl au se i n di s put e on appea l i s bol s t er ed by t he re m ai nder of t he st atut e. I n fac t , even i f the “upon t he compl et i on” cl aus e w as abs entfr om t he s t atut e,27 w e w oul d concl ude thata cl ai m under§ 1 2 1 4 7 (a) does not acc rue unt i l al t er at i ons ar e compl et ed.
A s t he D i s t r i ct C our t s t at ed, “[t ] o det erm i ne the ac crual dat e of a di s cr i m i nat i on cl ai m , a cour t m us tfocus on w hen the di s cr i m i nat or yactoccurr ed. ” D IA , 2006 W L 3392733, at* 14 ( ci t i ng C har don , 4 5 4 U. S

. a t8 )

. S e c t i o n 1 2 1 4 7 ( a ) d e f i n e s t wo cl os el yr el at ed di s cr i m i nat or yact s : t he fa i l ur e ( 1 ) “ to make” alt era ti o n s, an d (2) the fa il u re “ to en su re tha t .

. . alt era ti o n s are m ade, ” i n s uch a m annert hatt he al t er ed por t i ons of t r ans por t at i on fac i l i t i es ar e ac ces s i bl e and us abl e. R egar di ng t he fi r s t act , w e agr ee w i t h t he am i cus cur i ae s ubm i s s i on of the U

. S. D epart m entof J us t i ce thatas a m at t erof l og i c, t here can b e no “fai l [ure] t o m ake” the “alt ered po rt i on s” of a f aci l i t y acc es s i bl e unt i l t he al t er at i ons ar e compl et ed. T he re le v a n t ac t is “ to m a k e ”

— “ to c a u s e (s o m e th in g ) t o e x i s t.” B L ACK ’ S L AW D I C TI ON ARY 975 ( 8t h ed. 2004)

. M er el yfundi ng, des i gni ng, appr ovi ng, oreven c om m enci ng cons t ruct i on of al t er at i ons t hatw i l l notpr ovi de ac ces s i bi l i t ydoes not“ca us e” su c h a ltera tio n s “ to e x ist,” e sp e c iallyin lig h t o f th e n o to rio u sly c o n tin g e n t n a tu re o f

c o n s tru c tio n p la n s . See, e. g. , D I A v. Syke s , 833 F. 2d 1113, 1115 ( 3d C i r . 1987) ( s ubw ay s t at i on r enovat i on pl anned a nd funded i n 1979 butm odi fi ed i n 1981 t o exc lude el evat or )

. T her efor e, an i ndi vi dual cannots uffe rdi s cr i m i nat i on u n d er this po rt ion o f th e statute u n ti l the a lt era ti o n s are compl et ed.
U nl i ke the fi r s tdi s cr i m i nat or yact , t he s econd a ctcan l ogi cal l yoccurbefor e, dur i ng, oraft ercons t ruct i on. For e x a m p le , a p u b lic e n tity a rg u a b ly f a ils “ to e n s u re th a t . . .W e nevert hel es s ques t i on how pl ans can “en su re” 14 cert ai n r es ul t s , for i t i s axi om at i c t hateven the bes tl ai d pl ans of m ic e a n d m e n o f

te n g o a w ry. See, e. g. , Syke s , 833 F. 2d at1115; P at ers on- Lei t ch C o. v. M as s
. Mun. W

hol es al e E lec. Co. , 840 F .2 d 9 8 5 , 9 8 6 (1 st C ir. 1 9 8 8 ); se e g e n e ra lly H a rr is v . N .Y . S ta te D e p t. of He a lth , 202 F. Supp. 2d 143, 155 ( S. D

. N

. Y

. 2002) (“ [ A ]s is c o m m o n w isd o m , ev e n th e b e st la id p lan s a re b o u n d to cont ai n inh erentfl aw s , and — i n t he cour s e of thei revol ut i on f ro m id e a to re a lity , f

r o m r u d im e n ts to p e rf

e c ted m o d e l — to encount er oper at i onal and devel opm ent al di ffi cul t i es , and eve n to b e tes ted b yp u rp o se f u l h in d e rin g o r c o rru p tio n o f th e ir ef fe cti v e f u n cti o n ing

. ”). 28 al t er at i ons ar e m ade” w hen i t fai l s t o i ns i s tthat cons t ruct i on d ra w in g s inc lu d e c e rta in f e a tu re s. A lth o u g h ra tio n a l i n vacuo ,

14 th is re a d in g i s u n f

a ith f u l to th e s tru c tu re o f

th e s ta tu te

. P r i ce , 3 7 0 F

. 3 d at 36 9

. T h e p h rase “o r t o en su re tha t th e a lt era ti o n s are m ade” a pp ears i n p arentheses i m m ediat el y foll ow i ng t he p hrase “t o fai l t o m ake s uch al t er at i ons , ” i ndi cat i ng t hatt he meani ng of the form erphr as e i s r el at ed t o, ordepende ntupon, t he l att er. S e e P e ters v. A sh c ro

ft , 383 F. 3d 302, 309 ( 5t h C i r . 2004) ( not i ng t hat par enthes es “r educe [] the gr amm at i cal i m por t ” o f t he lan g u a g e c o n tain e d th e re in ); se e g e n e ra lly P ritc h a rdv . L ig g e tt & M yer s Tobacco C o. , 350 F. 2d 479, 483 ( 3d C i r . 1965) ( not i ng that p u n ctua ti o n ca n b e a relev an t fac tor i n statu tory in terp re tatio n ); S UT HE RL AN D § 47: 15, 261 ( favor i ng rul e that tr ea ts pu n ctua ti o n as a relev an t fac tor in statutoryco n stru cti o n ). F u rth e rm o re , b o th p h ra se s c e n ter a ro u n d a f o rm o f th e v e rb “ to m ake,” an add i t i on al in d ica t i on t hat theyare, i n D IA ’s w ords, “tw o s i des of the s ame coi n. ” See Mer r i l l Lynch, P i er ce, Fenner29 & Sm ith , In c . v. D a b it , 5 4 7 U

. S

. 7 1 , 8 6 ( 2 0 0 6 ) ( “ G e n e r a l l y, i dent i cal w or ds us ed i n di ffe r en t p ar t s of the s ame st atut e ar e .

. . pr es um ed t o have t he same m eani ng. ”) ( i nt ernal quot at i on and c itatio n o m itt e d ). G iv e n th is c o n te x t, w e h e sita te to a sc rib e to t he phr as e “e ns ur e thatt he al t er at i ons ar e m ade” t he br oad and in d e p e n d e n t m e a n in g S E P T A u rg e s . See Miz r ahi v. G onz al es , 492 F. 3d 156, 166 ( 2d C i r . 2007) ( decl i ni ng t o as cr i be i ndepende ntm eani ng t o par en thetical st atuto ryp h rase b eg inni ng w ith w o rd “ o r” b e c a u se “ it c a n re a so n a b ly b e c o n st r u e d to il lustrat e o r ex p lai n ” the p rec ed ing p h rase ).
I ti s m or e pr obabl e thatC ongr es s i ncl uded the par enthet i cal and us ed t h e pass i ve verb form “ar e made” beca us e i tr ecogni zed thata publ i c ent i t yi s r ar el yt he ent i t yt hat “make[s ] ” the al terat i ons . I ns t ead, al t er at i ons “ar e made” by s undr ycontr act or s and s ubcontr act or s. W i t houtt he par enthet i cal , a publ i c ent i t ycoul d i m m uni ze i tse l f fr om § 1 2 1 4 7 (a ) liab ili ty b y d e leg a tin g re n o v a tio n p rojec ts to p riv a te ent i t i es t hat ar e not s ubj ect t o A D A l i abi l i t y . 42 U

. S. C

. § 12132. T he par enthet i cal cl os es t hi s l oophol e by pl aci ng t he onus on t he publ i c ent i t y , as o p p o sed t o i t s agent s , “t o ens ur e” that alt era ti o n s “a re m ad e” in an ac ce ssible an d u sab le m an n er. T h is in terp re tatio n c o m p o rts w ith a sim ilar p ro v isio n in T itl e III o f

th e A D A (d e a lin g w ith p u b lic a c c o m m o d a tio n s):

“ [ D ]isc rim in a tio n . . . inc lu d e s — w ith re sp e c t to a f a c ility o r p a rt th e re o f

th a t is a lte re d b y , on behal f of , orfort he us e of a n es t abli sh m en ti n a m annert hataff

ect s or coul d aff

ect t he us abi l i t yof t he fa ci l i t yorpar tt her eof, a fa i l ur e t o m ake30 al t er at i ons i n s uch a m anner t hat , t o t he maxi m um e x ten t f e a sib le, th e a ltere d p o rtio n s o f th e f a c ili ty a re re a d ily a c c e ss ib le to a n d u sa b le b yin d iv id u a ls w ith d is a b iliti e s .”
42 U

. S. C

. § 12183( a) ( 2) ( emphasi s added)

. A bs entfr om § 12183( a) ( 2) i s t he “ort o ens ur e thatt he al t er at i ons ar e made” phr as e. I ns t ead, t he s t atut e pr ovi d es thatt he off endi ng al t er at i ons can be m ade “ by ” or“on be ha l f of” a p u b l i c e n t i t y. T hi s l a ng ua ge i s c on s i s t e ntw i t h o urc on c l us i on t ha tCong res s i ncluded t he par enthet i cal phr as e i n § 12147( a) t o covert he situ a tio n in w h ich a ltera tio n s to a p u b lic tra n sp o rta tio n f a c ili ty a r e m a d e “ o n b e h a l f

o f ” a p u b l i c e n t i t y. M or eover , r egar dl es s w hethert he “mak[er ] ” of the alt era ti ons i s t he publ i c ent i t yi t s el f ort he ent i t y ’ s agent s , t he gener al act i vi t y t hat § 12147( a) r egul at es i s t he sam e: t he

“ m ak[ing] ” o f

a lte ra tio n s . Cf

. 4 2 U. S

. C. § 3 6 0 4 ( f

) ( 3 ) ( C) ( r egul at i ng t he under l y i ng act i vi t i es of “ des i gn[i ng] and cons tr uct[i ng] ” mu l t i f

a mi l yd we l l i n g s ) ( e mp h a s e s a d d e d )

. As di s cus s ed, t he fa i l ur e t o “ m ake ” a lt era ti o n s in a ce rt ain m an n er, as opp os ed t o “pl an” or“des i gn” them, cannotl ogi cal l yoccur un t i l t he co m plet i on of suc h alt erat i on s. 3.
F i nal l y , t o es t abl i s h w hethera publ i c ent i t ycomm i t t ed t he di scri m i nat or yact s of “f ai l [i ng] t o m ake” al t er at i ons , or “fa i l [i ng]

. . . t o ens ur e that

. . . al t era ti o n s are m ade” i n an acc es s i bl e mann er, t he s t atut e di r ect s us t o det erm i ne w hether “the al t er ed p o r t i o n s o f t h e f a c i l i t y ar e rea di l yacc es s i bl e” —S ee , e.g., D IA , 2 0 0 6 W L 3 3 9 2 7 3 3 , a t * 1 2 (re f e rrin g to 15 “S E P T A ’s pl anned re n o v a tio n s” ) (e m p h a sis in o rig in a l); id

. ( form ul at i ng t he ques t i on pr es ent ed as “w hen, i n a s ui tundert he A D A , a di s cr i m i nat o r yact i on i s deemed t o have oc curr ed, w her e the al l eged di s cr i m i natory act i on i s t he vi ol at i on of a s t atut or yobl i gat i on t o i ncl ude an ac com m odat i on fordi s abl ed i ndi vi dual s i n pl anni ng and compl et i ng a cons t ruct i on pr oj ect ”) (e m p h a sis a d d e d ); id

. at *1 4 (no ti n g im p o rt an ce o f S E P T A ’s i nt ent i on t o “pr ocee d w i t h t he pl anned c o n stru c tio n a t th e 1 5 th and M arketSt r eetC our t y ar d w i t houti nstal li ng an el evat or ”) (em p h asis ad d ed ). 31 no tw hethert he p ort i on s t o be al t er ed w i l lbe r eadi l yacc es s i bl e. 42 U

. S. C

. § 12147( a) ( emphase s added)

. T he verb tenses empl oy ed by C ongr es s i n t hi s phr as e ( i.e

. “al t er ed, ” pas tt ens e, and “a r e, ” pr es entt ens e) fur t hercl ar i fyt hat t he t i m e forpas s i ng upon a publ i c ent i t y ’ s s ucce s s orfai l ur e i n compl y i ng w i t h t he st atute i s upo n co m plet i on of the al t erat i on s. In sh o rt, d e sp ite th e D istric t C o u rt’s r e p e a ted e m p h a sis on SE PT A ’ s cons t ruct i on pl ans , t he w or d “pl an” i s abs ent 15 from t he st atute w hil e t he p hrase “com plet i on of . .

. al t erat i on s” is prese n t. C o n sist en t w ith this lan g u ag e, a s w ell as th e struc ture a n d p u rp o se o f th e sta tu te, w e h o ld th a t th e d isc rim in a to rya c ts defi ned by§ 12147( a) occur , an d t he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons b e g in s to ru n , “ u p o n th e c o m p letio n o f

. . . a ltera tio n s” to p u b lic t ransport at i on faci l i t i es. B.32 B efor e di s cus s i ng the pol i cycons i der at i ons under l y i ng o u r h o lding , w e clari fy the pro p er ap p li ca ti o n o f th e d isco v ery rul e as it w as t he bas i s of the D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s hol di ng and the s ubj ectof ext ended d eb ate betw een the part i es . T he D i s t r i ct C our tr eas oned: [In ] th e a b sen ce o f a n yex p li citstatu to ry li m i t at i on per i od .

. . t he C our tm us tl ook el s e whe r e f

o rg u i d a n c e a s t o whe n a c a u s e of act i on such as t hi s one ac crues . U nderfede r al l aw , a cl ai m acc rues on t he dat e w hen the pl ai nt i ff k n o w s o r ha s re a so n to k n o w o f th e in ju ryth a t is t he bas i s of the ac t i on. T o det erm i ne the ac crual dat e of a di s cr i m i nat i on cl ai m , a courtm us tfocus on w hen the di s cr i m i nat or yactoccurr ed, not w h e n th e e f

f e c t o f th a t ac t b e c a m e p a in f

u l.
D IA , 2 0 0 6 W L 3392733, at*13- *14 ( i nt ernal quot at i ons and ci t at i ons om i t t ed)

. A lthough l ar gel yacc ur at e, t w o corr ect i ons to this st atem en t o f l aw are n ec essa ry . F ir st, as d iscu ssed in P art I V

. A , i n a d d i t i o n t o a r i s i n g f r o m a n “ e x p l i c i ts t a tu t o r y” d ir ec tiv e , id

. at*13, an ac crual dat e ca n ar i s e “byi m pl i cat i on fr om t he s t ructur e and t ext o f t he s t atut e. ” An dr e ws , 53 4 U. S. at27- 28. Second, the D i s t r i ctC our terr ed i n appl y i ng t he d is coveryrul e t o es t abl i s h w hen D I A ’ s cl ai m s acc rued be fo re firstd eterm ining , p e r th e term s o f § 1 2 1 4 7 (a), w h en D IA ’s a lleg e d in

ju rie s o c c u rre d . T h e se in q u iries a re a n a lytica lly d is tin c t.
B ec ause a pot ent i al pl ai nt i ff c annotdi s coverhi s i nj ury b e f o r e i th a s o c c u r r e d , t h e d i s c o v e r y ru l e o n l y po st po nes t he33 acc rual dat e of a cl ai m “w her e t he [pl ai nt i ff] i s unaw ar e of t he i nj ur y . ” C G B O ccup ati on al T herap y, Inc. v. R H

A Health S ervs. I nc. , 3 5 7 F .3 d 3 7 5 , 3 8 4 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 4 ). It d o e s n o t a c c e ler a te th e a c c ru a l d a te “ w h e n th e [ p lain tiff ] b e c o m e s a w a re th a t h e w ill s uffe ri nj ur yi n t he futur e. ” Id .; s e e Po d o b n i k v
. U. S. P os t al Ser v. , 4 0 9 F .3 d 5 8 4 , 5 9 0 ( 3 d C ir. 2 0 0 5 ) (“ T h e d isc o v e ryru le delays th e in iti a l ru n n in g o f th e sta tu te o f

lim itatio n s, b u t o n ly unt i l the p lai n ti ff ha s di s cover ed: ( 1) t hathe ors he has been i nj ur ed; and ( 2) t hat t hi s i nj ur y has been caused b yanot her p arty ’s conduct

. ”) ( em p h asis ad d ed ); O s hi verv. Levi n, F is hbei n, Sedr an & Ber m an , 38 F. 3d 1380, 1386 ( 3d C i r. 1 9 9 4 ) ( T he d isco v eryrul e “

po st po nes th e begi nni ng of the l i m i t at i ons per i od fr om t h e d ate a pl ai nt i ff w as w r onged unt i l t he dat e a pl ai nt i ff d isco v ers tha t he o r she w as in jured

. ”) (em p h asis ad d ed ).
A c c o rd in g ly , the f

irst ste p in a p p ly in g th e d isc o v e ryru le i n a s i tuat i on l i ke the pr es ent i s t o es t abl i s h w hen the i nj ur i ous d is c ri m in a to ry a c t d e f

in e d b yth e s ta tu te a c tu a lly o c c u rr e d

. See P o d o b n ik , 409 F. 3d at590. T h e sec o n d s t ep i s t o det erm i ne w hethert hati n

juryw as i m m edi at el ydi s cover abl e, orw hether t he accrual dat e w i l l be pos t poned unt i l i ti s r eas onabl e t o expec t th e p la i n t i f

f t o d is c o v e r t h e in

ju ry. O s hi ver , 38 F. 3d at1386. H avi ng s ki pped st ep one, t he D i s t r i ct C our t ’ s appl i cat i on of the di s coveryrul e r es ul t ed i n an ac crual dat e that p rec eded the occu rr ence o f D IA ’s al l eged i njur i es. B eca us e D I A w as not i nj ur ed befor e S E PT A compl et ed it s alt era ti o n s, the d isco v eryrule w o u ld n o t hav e re n d ere d D IA ’s c l a i m s u n t i m e l y.34 C.
W e conc l u de byr evi ew i ng t he pol i cycons i der at i ons u n d e rl y in g o u r h o ld in g . S e e Pr i ce , 3 7 0 F

. 3 d at 37 5

. In p a rticu lar , w e a p p re c iate th e D istric t C o u rt’s c o n c e rn th a t: [ I ] twou l d b e i mpr a c t i c a l t o i mpo s e upon a defe ndantt he r equi r ement t hati tful l ycompl et e a fac i l i t y m odi fi cat i on befor e havi ng t o addr es s any a ss e rtio n th a t m o d if

ic a tio n s th a t ca n b e c lea rly under s t ood fr om des i gn d raw ing s and s peci fi cat i ons amount t o al t er at i ons t r i gger i ng an o b li g ati o n u n d er the A D A that m igh t r eq u ir e sig n if ica n t an d m a ter ial m o d if ica tio n s tha t su re ly w oul d have be en more eas i l y , eff i ci ent l yand economi cal l yi ncorpor at ed w el l pr i or to t he compl et i on of the w or k.
D IA , 2 0 0 6 W L 3 3 9 2 7 3 3 , at * 1 3 . T h is c o n c e rn — th a t p u b lic ent i t i es w i l l i ncurunnece s s aryexpens e i f pot ent i al pl ai nt i ffs can w a it u n til “ th e las t n a il i s h a m m e re d in to p lac e ” to b rin g su it — i s as s uaged bya numberof m i t i gat i ng an d count ervai l i ng c o n s id e ra tio n s . Id

. F irst, o u r in terp re tatio n o f § 1 2 1 4 7 (a ) d o e s n o t p re v e n t a p u b li c e n ti tyli k e S E P T A fro m o b t ai ni ng pr el i m i naryd ec laratory r el i ef t o ens ur e A D A com pl i ance pr i ort o comm enci ng a lte ra tio n s . See 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 0 1 . D e c lar a to r y r e lief is avail ab le “ t o set t l e actual cont rovers i es bef or e th e yrip e n in to vi ol at i ons of a l aw or a br eac h of duty . ” U nited S tates v. F isherO t is C o. , 4 9 6 F .2 d 1 1 4 6 , 1 1 5 1 (1 0 th C ir. 1 9 7 4 ) (e m p h a sis35 ad d ed ); s ee Step- Saver D ata Sys

. , I nc. v. W ys e Tech. , 912 F. 2d 6 4 3 , 6 4 7 (3d C ir

. 1 9 9 0 ). S u ch reli ef is ap p rop ri ate w h ere “the re i s a s ub s t a nt i a l c on t r ov e r s y , be t w e e n p a r t i e s ha vi ng a dv e r se le g a l in te re s ts , o f s u f

f ic ie n t im m e d ia c y a n d re a lity.” A r m s tr ong Wo r ld I n d u s
. , I n c
. b y Wo l f s o n v
. A da ms , 961 F. 2d 405, 411 ( 3d C i r . 1992) ( quot i ng M

d. C as
. C o. v. P aci

f i c C oal & O i lC o. , 312 U

. S

. 2 7 0 , 2 7 3 (19 4 1 )).
A l t hough SE PT A ’ s act i vi t i es d id notr i pen i nt o actual vi ol at i ons of § 12147( a) unt i l SE PT A compl et ed i t s al t er at i ons to th e 1 5 th S tre e t an d C ityH a ll C o u rty a rd s, a su b sta n tial, i m m edi at e, and r eal contr over s yexi sted betw een SEP T A and D I A r egar di ng t hes e ac t i vi t i es m uch ea r l i er . O n A ugus t3, 2000, D I A ’ s at t or ney , St ephen G o ld, w r ot e t o C i t yC om m i s s i oner E d w a rd M c L a u g h lin e x p re ss in g D IA ’s c o n c e r n th a t th e 1 5 th S tre e t C o u rty a rd p rojec t w o u ld n o t c o m p ly w ith th e A D A . G o ld r el ay ed t he s ame c oncerns t o SE PT A t hr oughout2000 i n a s er i es o f m e e tin g s w ith S E P T A a n d th e C ity . In th e se m e e tin g s, G o ld a lso d isc u ss e d S E P T A ’s A D A o b lig a tio n s re g a rd in g th e C ity Hal l Cou r t y a r d p r o

j e c t

. Be c a u s e o f t h e s e i n t e r a c t i o n s , SEP TA w a s “ a n x io u s” to g e t a c o m m itm e n t f ro m D IA “ th a t th e re w o u ld notbe a l aw s ui t ” and w as undeni abl yaw ar e thata s ubs t ant i al co n tr o v ersy e x is ted

. A cc o rdin g ly , to the ex tent that S E P T A ’s pl anned “ m odi fi cat i ons [coul d be] cl ear l yunder s t ood fr om des i gn dr aw i ngs and s peci fi cat i ons , ” SE PT A coul d have o b tai n ed a d ec laratoryjud g m en t t o assu ag e it s an x iet ies b ef o re pr ocee di ng w i t h cons t ruct i on. C onver s el y , ouri nt erpr et at i on of § 12147( a) does not p re v e n t an e n tit y li k e D IA f ro m se e k in g a n in

ju n c tio n p rio r to t h e c o mm e n c e me n t o f c o n s t ru c t i o n t o p r e v e n tt h r e a t e n e d ADA36 v io la tio n s . See 4 3 A C .J .S

. I nj unct i on § 8 (“A p reli m inary i nj unct i on i s an ant i ci pat or yr emedyw hi ch pr ev ent s t he p e rp e tra tio n o f

a th re a ten e d w ro n g . . . . ” ); U ni t e d Stat e s v
. W

. T. G r antC o. , 3 4 5 U .S . 6 2 9 , 6 3 3 (1 9 5 3 ); Sw i f t& C o. v. U

ni t ed Stat es , 2 7 6 U

. S

. 3 1 1 , 3 2 6 (19 2 8 ).
T h e re is litt le d o u b t th a t it w o u ld h a v e b e e n b e tter f o r a ll i f D I A orSE PT A had s oughtdecl ar at o r yori nj unct i ve r el i ef b e f o re c o n stru c tio n b e g a n . It d o e s n o t f o llo w , h o w e v e r, th a t a cl ai m for r el i ef on the mer i t s under§ 12147( a) acc rues as s oon a s c la im s f

o r d e c la ra to ry a n d in

ju n c tiv e re lie f

a c c ru e . R am ey v
. D is tr i ct 141 , 378 F. 3d 26 9 , 279 n. 4 ( 2d C i r . 2004) ( “[T] he pos s i bi l ityof m ai nt ai ni ng a pr el i m i naryi nj unct i on pr ocee di ng d o e s n o t trigg e r th e s ta tu te o f lim itatio n s.” ); s ee Rei t erv. C ooper , 5 0 7 U .S . 2 5 8 , 2 6 7 (1 9 9 3 ) (“ W h il e it i s th e o re tica lly p o ssi bl e fora s t atut e t o cr eat e a c aus e of a ct i on t hatacc rues at one t i m e fo r t he purpos es of ca l cul at i ng w hen the s t atue of l i m i t at i ons begi ns t o run, bu t at an o t hert i m e forpurpos es of br i ngi ng s ui t , w e w i l l not i nfer s uch an odd r es ul ti n t he abs ence o f a n ysu c h in d ica tio n in th e sta tu te .”); D a sg u p ta v. U ni v. of W is. B d . o f R eg e n ts , 121 F. 3d 1138, 1140 ( 7t h C i r . 1997) ( “I f an e m p lo y e r te lls h is e m p lo y e e , ‘I a m g o in g to in f rin g e y o u r rig h ts u n d e r T itl e V II a t lea st o n c e e v e ryy e a r y o u w o rk f o r m e ,’ th is d o es n o t st art th e statute o f lim ita ti o n s run n ing o n the f u ture vi ol at i ons , vi ol at i ons t hat have noty etbeen c om m i t t ed. ”)

. T he fol l ow i ng hypot het i cal adapt ed fr om ou r d ec i s i on i n CGB O ccupat i onalTher apy , 3 5 7 F .3 d a t 3 8 4 n .9 , il lu stra tes o u r p o in t.
A t el eph on e com pan y i nfo rm s a ho m eow ner t hat i thas a r i ght

- of- w ayacr os s t he homeow ner ’ s pr oper t y , and thatnext Fr i day , i tpl ans to u ti l i ze the r i ght

- of- w ayt o r epai ran37 under gr ound l i ne. T he hom eow neri nform s t he companyt hathe di s put es t he par amet er s of t he r i ght

- of- w ay . U pon r ece i vi ng not i ce of t hi s contr over s y , t he phone c om panycoul d s eek a decl ar at or yj udgm entt o es t abl i s h the par amet er s of the r i ght

- ofw a ya n d p ro te c t its e lf

f ro m f u tu re tr e s p a s s lia b ility. See Cent el C abl e Tel evis i on C o. v. A dm i r al ’s C ove Ass ocs
. , Ltd. , 835 F. 2d 1 3 5 9 , 1 3 6 1 (1 1 th C ir. 1 9 8 8 ); C om m w
. v. W er t el et , 696 A

. 2d 206, 209- 10 ( Pa. Super

. 1997)

. C onv erse ly , t he homeow ner coul d obt ai n an i nj unct i on t o pr eventt he phone com panyfr om ent er i ng hi s pr oper t y unt i l t he ri ght

- of- w ay di s put e i s r es ol ved. See W er t el et , 6 9 6 A

. 2 d at 2 0 9 -10

. E v en tho u g h b o th d ec laratory and i nj unct i ve r el i ef a r e ava i l abl e, t he homeow nerhas no tre sp a ss c laim a g a in st th e p h o n e c o m p a n yu n til it p h y sic a lly e n te rs h is p ro p e rt y . C G B O ccupat i ona l Ther apy , 357 F. 3d at 3 8 4 n .9 ; s ee U

ni t ed Stat es v. U

ni on C or p. , 277 F. Supp. 2d 478, 495 ( E

. D

. Pa. 2003) ( ci ti ng R ES TAT EMEN T (2 D ) OF T ORTS § 1 5 8 ).
A s su m e tha t neither p artysee k s p reli m inaryreli ef and the phone companyent er s the hom eow ner ’ s pr oper t y . A tt he m o m e n t o f e n tr y , th e h o m e o w n e r’ s tr e s p a s s c la im a c c ru e s . See C G B O ccupat i onalTher apy , 3 5 7 F .3 d a t 3 8 4 n .9 ; U ni on C or p. , 277 F. Supp. 2d at495. I t w o u ld be i ncorr ectt o s ayt hatt he s t a tu t e o f l i mi t a t i o n s o n t h i s c l a i m b e g a n t o ru n f r o m th e t i me t h e p a rt ie s d is c o v e re d th e d is p u te re g a rd in g th e ri g h t- o f

- w a y. Si m i l ar l y , i tw oul d be i ncorr ectt o s ay that t he s t atut e of l i m it at i ons on a § 12147( a) cl ai m begi ns t o run as s oon as t he p a rties d isc o v e r a c o n tro v e rsy th a t m a ye n tit le th e m to pr el i m i narydecl ar at or yand i nj unct i ve r el i ef.A lth o u g h w e d o n o t d e c id e th is q u e stio n , w e w o u ld 16 hes i t at e t o appl yt he di s coveryrul e i n s uch a manner

. T he di s coveryrul e or i gi nat ed as an equi t abl e doctr i ne t o ext end the per i od dur i ng w hi ch vi ct i m s of l aten t i nj ur i es coul d s eek re c o v e ry. An dr e ws , 534 U

. S. at 27 ( not i ng t hatt he “c r yfor[the di s covery ] ru le i s l oudes t ” i n “l at entdi s eas e and medi cal m a lp ra c tice ” c a se s); O shi ver , 38 F. 3d at1386 n. 5 ( not i ng t hat 38 I n l i ght of the ava i l abi l i t yof pr el i m i naryr el i ef t o par t i es fac i ng t he di l emm a t hat confr ont ed D I A and SE PT A , w e bel i eve th e D istric t C o u rt’s c o n c e rn th a t p u b lic e n tit ies w ill b e f o rc e d to “r e- engi neer ” compl et ed pr oj ect s “t o add the A D A

- compl i ance f e a tu re s ” is o v e rs ta te d

. D IA , 2006 W L 3392733, at *13. T hat m a yb e th e u n f

o rtu n a te c o n se q u e n c e o f o u r d e c isio n in th is instan ce , h o w ev er. Second, t he D i s t r i ct C our t ’ s des i r e t o gi ve publ i c ent i t i es r epos e fr om § 12147( a) l i abi l i t yi s n o t a dvance d byan i nt erpr et at i on of t he st atut e t hat i ncorpor at es t he di s coveryrul e. S ee D IA , 2 0 0 6 W L 3 3 9 2 7 3 3 , at * 1 3 -* 1 4

. T h e d isc o v e ryru le di ct at es t hata ca us e of a ct i on acc rues w hen a pot ent i al cl ai m ant di s cover s, ors houl d have di s cover ed, t he i nj ur yt hatform s t he b a s is o f h is c la im

. R om ero , 4 0 4 F .3 d a t 2 2 2 . A s D IA a rg u e s, it i s eas yt o i m agi ne a s i tuat i on w here an i ndi vi dual w i t h a di s abi l i t yr el ocat es t o Phi l adel phi a manyy ear s fr om now and at t empt s t o us e the 15th St r ee t orC i t yH al l C our t y ar d fort he fi r s tt i m e. A court m igh t f ai r l yconcl ude thatt hi s i ndi vi dual nei t herdi s cover ed, nor , havi ng m oved fr om s om e di s t antl ocal e, sh o u ld h a v e d isc o v e re d , the in a c c e ss ibi l ityo f th e se sta tio n s u n til his arr i val there. P erh a p s r ecog nizi ng t his dan ger, C on gress 16“the di s coveryru l e ’ s or i gi ns ar e i n pr oduct s l i abi l i t yand medi cal m al pr act i ce cas es ”)

. W e fi nd not hi ng l at ent about t h e inju r i es defi ned i n § 12147( a) be caus e the fa ctt hatnew l yr enovat ed su b w a ysta tio n s d o n o t in c lu d e e lev a to rs s h o u ld b e re a d ily appar entt o anyr eas onabl ydi l i gentpot ent i al pl ai nt i ff. A s fur t herevide n ce of the i ndet erm i nat e natur e of 17 SE PT A ’ s i nt erpr et at i on of § 12147( a) , SE PT A ’ s couns el fai l ed ator al ar gum entt o i dent i fya poi ntdur i ng t he pl anni ng phas es of t he 15 t h Str e e t a nd Ci t y H a l l pr oj e c t s ( e .g
. u p on r ece i ptof fundi ng, appr oval of bl uepr i nt s , or l et t i ng of contr act s ) atw hi ch i tw oul d have be en r eas onabl e t o concl ude thatD I A s houl d have dis cov ered i t s al l eged i njur i es. 39 r ej e c t e d a v a r i a b l e a c c ru a l d a t e i n f a v o r o f a b r i g h t

- l i n e r ul e: 17 § 1 2 1 4 7 (a) claim s ac cru es “ u p o n the c o m p let ion o f

. . . al t erat i o n s.” W e fi nd no t hing “i m plausi ble, ” m uch l ess im p ru d e n t, a b o u t th is d e c is io n . D IA , 2006 W L 3392733, at*13
T o the con t rary , w e fi n d t hat C on gress struck a w i se bal ance betw een the pl ai nt i ff- fr i endl ya c c ru a l rul e j us tdes cr i bed an d the de fe n d an t- frien d ly rule ad v an ce d b y S E P T A

. If § 12147( a) di ct at ed t hat cl ai m s acc rued dur i ng the p l anni ng s tag e s o f

a p rojec t as S E P T A su g g e sts , p o ten tial c laim a n ts w oul d be enc our aged t o s ue ear l y and oft en, and publ i c ent i t i es w oul d have l i t t l e opportuni t y t o addr es s acc es s abi l i t yconce r ns in f o rm a llyb e f

o re b e in g h a ile d in to f

e d e ra l c o u rt

. S e e Fra n c o n ia A s s oc. v. U

ni t ed Stat es , 5 3 6 U .S . 1 2 9 , 1 4 6 -4 7 (2 0 0 2 ). T h is r es ul tw oul d be ant i t het i cal t o C ongr es s ’ s expl i ci tdi r ect i ve that40 A D A cl ai m s be r es ol ved w heneve rappr opr i at e thr ough “al t ernat i ve means of di s put e r es ol ut i on. ” 42 U

. S. C

. § 12212.
S E P T A ’s p ro f

f e re d ru le a lso e n c o u r a g e s c laim a n ts to br i ng unr i pe l aw s ui t s t hat r el y on “cont i ngent futur e event s t hat m a yn o t o c c u r a s a n tic ip a te d , o r i n d e e d m a y n o t o c c u r a t a ll.” Texas v. U

ni t ed Stat es , 523 U

. S

. 296, 300 ( 1998)

. H er e, for ex am p le, S E P T A co u ld h av e d ec ided to install elev ators b ef o re c o mp l e t i n g i t s r e n o v a t i o n s , t h u s m a k i n g DI A’ s AD A a n d RA c l a i m s u n n e c e s s a r y. T h ir d , the fa cts o f th is ca se be li e th e D istri c t C o u rt ’s su g g e stio n th a t ap p ly in g th e d isc o v e ryru le to § 1 2 1 4 7 (a ) w ill as s ur e that acc es s i bi l i t y conce r ns w i l l be addr es s ed “w el l pr i or t o co m p let i on of the w or k. ” D IA , 2006 W L 3392733, at*13. In f a c t, un d e r th e D istric t C o u r t’ s a c c ru a l th e o ry , D IA c o u ld h a v e f i l e d a t i me l yc l a i m after SE PT A compl et ed the 15th St r eet St at i on r enovat i ons . T he D i s t r i ctC our tconcl uded thatD I A had n o tice o f S E P T A ’s a lleg e d lyin

ju rio u s a ltera tio n s to th e 1 5 th St r eetC our t y ar d “no l at ert han N ovember1, 2000. ” D IA , 2006 W L 3392733, at*14. A cce pt i ng t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s concl us i on t hatD I A ’ s caus e of a ct i on acc rued on thi s dat e, D I A w oul d have had unt i l N ovember1, 2002 t o br i ng s ui t

. SE PT A compl et ed cons t ruct i on on t he 15th St r eetC our t y ar d on A u g u st 8, 2002, t hree m on t hs bef

or e N ovember 1, 2002. T hus , i ti s appar entt hat th e ru le o f law e sta b lish e d b yth e D istric t C o u rt is in e f f e c tu a l in p re v e n tin g c a se s f

r o m b e in g b ro u g h t af ter c o n stru c tio n is compl et ed.
In su m , alth o u g h w e re co g n ize the D istri ct C o u rt ’s c o n c e rn s a b o u t th e in e f f icie n c yo f

re q u irin g p u b lic e n tit ies to41 addr es s acc es s i bi l i t ydefi ci enci es aft ert he expe ndi tur e of s ubs t ant i al r es our ces , t hati s t he “na tur al eff ec[ t ] of t h e choi ce C ongr es s has m ade” w hen i ti ncl uded the phr as e “upon the c o m p le t i o n o f s u c h a lte ra tio n s ” in th e s ta tu te

. R i cks , 44 9 U. S. at260 n. 11 ( ci t at i on om i t t ed)

. W e ar e bound byt hi s choi ce. V. It is u n d isp u ted th a t D IA ’s § 1 2 1 4 7 (a ) c laim s w e re tim e ly i f t he s t a tu t e o f l i mi t a t i o n s b e g a n t o ru n f r o m th e d a t e t he alt era ti o n s to the 1 5 th S tr ee t and C ityH all S tat ion s w ere c o m p le te d

. See A pp’ x 159, 180 ( 15t h St r eetC our t y ar d pr oj ect compl et ed on A ugus t8, 2002) ; A pp’ x 2 ( C om pl ai ntr egar di ng 15t h St r eet C our t y ar d fi l ed on M ar ch 14, 2003) ; A p p ’x 1 6 4, 18 8, 32 0 (C i t yH al l C o u rty ard proj ectcom plet ed in A ug ust 2003) ; A pp’ x 11 ( C om p l ai ntr egar di ng C i t yH al l C our t y ar d fi l ed on February15, 2005)

. B eca us e w e have s o hel d, w e r ever s e the Di s t r i c tCou r t ’ s g r a n to f s u mma r y j u d g me n t i n f a v o ro f SEP TA and r emand for fur t her pr ocee di ngs cons i s t ent w i t h t he opi ni on.