Munoz

Munoz v. Peets Coffee, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 22, 20254:24-cv-01764California3,210 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 VERONICA MUNOZ, et al., Case No. 24-cv-01764-JST

Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

v. DISMISS

PEETS COFFEE, INC., Re: ECF No. 48 Defendant.

12 Before the Court is Defendant Peet’s Coffee, Inc.’s (“Peet’s”) motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. ECF No. 48. The Court will grant the motion. I. BACKGROUND Because the facts are well-known to the parties and the Court has summarized Plaintiffs’ allegations in detail in its prior order, ECF No. 41, the Court will not repeat them here. In sum, Plaintiffs Veronica Munoz, Jennifer Wilkinson, Katherine Hetherton, and Michelle Irwin bring this action against Peet’s for allegedly discriminating against them on the basis of their disability—being lactose intolerant and having milk allergies—by charging a “surcharge” to substitute the dairy milk used in their drinks with non-dairy alternatives. Plaintiffs allege violations of Title III of the Americans with…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.