Whitaker
Whitaker v. Emeryville Hotel Development Venture II, L.P.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 BRIAN WHITAKER, Case No. 21-cv-00007-DMR
Plaintiff,
ORDER ADMINISTRATIVELY
v. CLOSING CASE
EMERYVILLE HOTEL DEVELOPMENT
VENTURE II, L.P.,
11 Defendant. 12 Plaintiff Brian Whitaker alleges that Defendant Emeryville Hotel Development Venture II, L.P. violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, Cal. Civ. Code §§ 51-53. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss, which is pending. [Docket No. 9.] At issue in this case is the scope of the regulations implementing the ADA, specifically with respect to reservations systems for lodging facilities. See 28 C.F.R. § 36.302(e)(1)(i), 28 C.F.R. § 36.302(e)(1)(ii). Those regulations are collectively referred to as the “Reservations Rule.” The Ninth Circuit has yet to interpret the Reservations Rule, but appeals are currently pending in at least two cases. See Love v. Marriott Hotel Srvcs., Inc., No. 20-cv-07137-TSH, 2021 WL 810252…