Case Name: Henry PEREIRA; American Disability Institute, a non-profit Pennsylvania corporation, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-07
Citations: 329 F. App'x 134
Docket Number: No. 08-55078
Parties: Henry PEREIRA; American Disability Institute, a non-profit Pennsylvania corporation, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, PREGERSON, Circuit Judge, and QUIST, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 329
Pages: 134–134

Head Matter:
Henry PEREIRA; American Disability Institute, a non-profit Pennsylvania corporation, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 08-55078.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted April 15, 2009.
Filed July 7, 2009.
Todd S. Collins, Esquire, Berger & Montague, Philadelphia, PA, Evan Jason Smith, Esquire, Brodsky & Smith, LLC, Bala Cynwyd, PA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
Gregory Francis Hurley, Esquire, Senior Litigation, Law Offices of Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Michael Chilleen, Esquire, Irvine, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, PREGERSON, Circuit Judge, and QUIST, District Judge.
The Honorable Gordon J. Quist, United States District Judge for the Western District of Michigan, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The defendant's "voluntary cessation of allegedly illegal conduct" did not moot this case. United States v. W.T. Grant Co., 345 U.S. 629, 632, 73 S.Ct. 891, 97 L.Ed. 1303 (1953). The plaintiff has standing to challenge "all barriers" at Ralphs that are related to his disability, not just those identified in the F & F Report. Doran v. 7-Eleven, Inc., 524 F.3d 1034, 1047 (9th Cir.2008).
REVERSED & REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.