Brooks

Brooks v. Tapestry, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 30, 20222:21-cv-00156California876 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 VALERIE BROOKS, individually and on No. 2:21-cv-00156-TLN-JDP behalf of all others similarly situated, 12 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 14 TAPESTRY, INC. d/b/a KATE SPADE, a Maryland corporation; and DOES 1 to 10 inclusive 16 Defendants.

18 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Valerie Brooks’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Appointment of Interim Class Counsel. (ECF No. 11.) Defendant Tapestry Inc. d/b/a Kate Spade (“Defendant”) filed an opposition. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff did not file a reply. For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion. /// /// /// /// /// /// I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiff, who is legally blind, can only experience the internet through screen-reading software. (ECF No. 1 at 8.) Defendant operates a website that provides consumers with access to information regarding women’s handbags, wallets, clothing, shoes, accessories, and more. (Id. at 7.) Plaintiff alleges she cannot use…

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.