Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Martinez v. Adidas America, Inc.

United States District Court, C.D. California

July 9, 2019

Abelardo Martinez, Jr., et al.
v.
Adidas America, Inc.

          PRESENT: THE HONORABLE JESUS G. BERNAL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

          CIVIL MINUTES-GENERAL

         Proceedings: Order (1) GRANTING Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand (Dkt. No. 11); and (2) REMANDING this Action (IN CHAMBERS)

         Before the Court is Plaintiffs Abelardo Martinez, Jr. and Roy Rios' (“Plaintiffs”) Motion to Remand. (“Remand Motion, ” Dkt. No. 11.) The Court finds the Remand Motion appropriate for resolution without a hearing. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 78; L.R. 7-15. On July 3, 2019, the Court took the matter under submission. (Dkt. No. 15.) After considering all papers filed in support of and in opposition to the Remand Motion, the Court GRANTS the Remand Motion.

         I. BACKGROUND

         On April 19, 2019, Plaintiffs filed this action in the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside. (“Complaint, ” Dkt. No. 1-1.) Plaintiffs are blind individuals who require screen reading software to read website content and access the internet. (Id. ¶ 4.) Plaintiffs allege Defendant Adidas America, Inc.'s (“Defendant”) website contains access barriers that deny Plaintiffs and other blind and visually-impaired individuals full and equal access to its products and services. (Id.) Plaintiffs allege one cause of action arising under the Unruh Civil Rights Act ("UCRA"), California Civil Code § 51 et seq. (Id. ¶¶ 22-25.) Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief and statutory damages under the UCRA. (Id. ¶¶ 27-28.)

         On May 6, 2019, Defendant removed the action to this Court. (“Notice of Removal, ” Dkt. No. 1.) On May 22, 2019, Plaintiffs filed their Remand Motion. (See Remand Mot.) In support of their Remand Motion, Plaintiffs filed the following documents:

• Declaration of Scott J. Ferrell (“Ferrell Declaration, ” Dkt. No. 11-1);
• May 9, 2019 Email to Defense Counsel (“May 9 Email, ” Dkt. No. 11-2);
• Request for Judicial Notice (“RJN, ” Dkt. Nos. 11-3, 11-4, 11-5, 11-6, 11-7); and . Proposed Order (Dkt. No. 11-8).

         Defendant opposed the Remand Motion on June 3, 2019. (“Remand Opp'n, ” Dkt. No. 12.)[1] In support of its Remand Opposition, Defendant submitted the following documents:

         • Declaration of Gregory F. Hurley (“Hurley Declaration, ” Dkt. No. 12-1);

o May 8-9, 2019 Emails between Counsel (“Ex. A, ” Dkt. No. 12-2);
o May 26, 2019 Email to Plaintiffs' Counsel (“Ex. B, ” Dkt. No. 12-3);
o Martinez Trial Brief from Martinez v. San Diego County Credit Union, Superior Court of California for the County of San Diego, Case No. 37-2017- 00024673-CU-CR-NC (“Ex. C, ” Dkt. No. 12-4);
o Court Order from Martinez v. San Diego County Credit Union (“Ex. D, ” Dkt. No. 12-5);
o Complaint in Thurston v. Toys “R” Us, Inc., Case No. 5:16-cv-02672-JAK (AGRx) (“Ex. E, ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.