Irma Ramirez v. Golden Creme Donuts

Good Law
670 F. App'x 620
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 10, 201614-17054California723 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Irma Ramirez and Daren Heatherly (the “Appellants”), both of whom are disabled, sued Golden Créme Donuts and the owners of the building in which it operates (collectively, “Golden Créme Donuts”), alleging several violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (the “ADA”) and California law. After Appellants filed suit, Golden Créme Donuts remediated all of the alleged ADA violations in the donut shop except for those associated with the public restroom, to which it permanently closed off public access. When the parties cross-moved for summary judgment, the sole disputed ADA violation pertained to the restroom. The district court granted Golden Créme Donuts’s motion concluding that, because the restroom was no longer open to the public, it was no longer subject to the dictates of the ADA, and thus the case was moot. The district court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Appellants’ state-law claims. On appeal, Appellants contend that Golden Créme Donuts’s closure of the restroom did not moot their claim for injunctive relief under the ADA, and that, because Golden Créme Donuts violated the California Retail Food Code—which, they argue, requires Golden…

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.