Sharon Hulihan v. Circle K Stores

MEMORANDUM

Sharon Hulihan appeals pro se from the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Circle K on her negligence, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and state law anti-discrimination claims. We have jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . The facts of this case are known to the parties. We need not repeat them here.

“We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, and may affirm on any basis supported by the record.” Gordon v. Virtumundo, Inc., 575 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir.2009). “We review the evidence in a light most favorable to the non-moving party and decide whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court correctly applied the substantive law.” FTC v. Stefanchik, 559 F.3d 924, 927 (9th Cir.2009).

The district court properly granted summary judgment to Circle K on Hulihan’s ADA claim. “Injunctive relief is the sole remedy available to private parties under the Disabilities Act; it does not authorize a claim for money damages.” Antoninetti v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., 643 F.3d 1165, 1174 (9th Cir.2010). Because Huli-han concedes that the new ramp is ADA-compliant, this claim is…