Acosta

Acosta v. Parra Perez

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 6, 20201:19-cv-01224California4,245 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. Introduction

11 This lawsuit is about a brick-and-mortar store in Fresno, California, that allegedly 12 discriminated against a physically disabled customer. The disabled customer is Plaintiff Jose 13 Acosta. The store is Lesly’s Gifts and More, which is operated by Defendant Maria Perez. The 14 store’s premises are owned by Defendant Thu Huynh, who leases the premises to Perez. Acosta 15 sued Perez and Huynh for disability discrimination in violation of Title III of the Americans with 16 Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, 17 Cal. Civ. Code § 51. 18 Perez now moves the Court to dismiss Acosta’s claims pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the 19 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because, according to 20 Perez, Acosta lacks standing under Article III of the Constitution. See Doc. No. 10. Huynh joins 21 Perez’s motion. See Doc. No. 22. For reasons discussed below, the Court will deny Perez’s 22 motion.

II. Facts

24 Acosta made the following allegations in his verified complaint to support his disability 25 discrimination claims. See Doc. No. 6 (first amended verified…

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.