Richard Paul Merrell v. Tapestry, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 20255:25-cv-02510California1,796 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD PAUL MERRELL, Case No. 23-cv-06671-RFL

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

v. TRANSFER

TAPESTRY, INC., Re: Dkt. No. 63 Defendant.

In December 2023, Vivian Salazar, a resident of Contra Costa County, California, filed a class action lawsuit against Tapestry, Inc., a Maryland corporation with its headquarters in Maryland. Salazar alleged that Tapestry’s website violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq., and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 51, et seq. In her original and first amended complaint, Salazar alleged that Tapestry’s website contained improperly coded form elements, which (a) prohibited her and members of the putative class from completing purchases on the website and (b) denied them the goods and services of Tapestry’s brick-and-mortar retail stores. (Dkt. No. 1 at 7–8; Dkt. No. 18 at 7–8.) On June 24, 2025, the Court granted Salazar’s motion for leave to file a second amended complaint to substitute Richard Paul Merrell, a resident of Riverside County, California, as the named plaintiff. …

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.