Castaneda
Castaneda v. Burger King Corp.
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.