Castaneda

Castaneda v. Burger King Corp.

Good Law
597 F. Supp. 2d 1035·2009 WL 398489·2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12310
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 18, 2009C 08-04262 WHACalifornia5,810 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alsup, J.

ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS; DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR A STAY OF CERTAIN DISCOVERY; PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL REMOVAL OF CONFIDENTIAL DESIGNATION

INTRODUCTION

In this disability-rights action, plaintiff Miguel Castaneda sued on behalf of himself and others similarly situated for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act as well as state law. Plaintiff alleges access violations at a subset of Burger King’s restaurants in California: those that Burger King leases to or from other entities. Well before the Rule 23 stage, defendants move to dismiss the claims, inter alia, on the grounds that plaintiff lacks standing to assert claims with respect to those stores he has not alleged personally to have visited. Defendants also move to stay discovery into the class claims pending resolution of the instant motion to dismiss. Finally, plaintiff has filed a motion to compel removal of defendants’ designation of certain discovery as confidential. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion to dismiss is Denied. Defendants’ motion for a stay is also Denied. Plaintiffs motion to compel removal of confidential designation is Granted.

STATEMENT

For the purposes of this…

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.