Click to access the website for the Civil Rights Division of the US Department of Justice Click on Cases under one of the following topics that interests yo

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

KRISTEN CLARKE Assistant Attorney General REBECCA B. BOND (Cal. Bar. No. 202220) Chief, Disability Rights Section KEVIN J. KIJEWSKI Deputy Chief, Disability Rights Section ANNA BOBROW CHERYL ROST FELICIA SADLER Trial Attorneys, Disability Rights Section U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Ave, N.W., – 4 CON Washington, D.C. 20530 Telephone: (202) 598-9620 Facsimile: (202) 305-9775 Email: [email protected]

[email protected] [email protected]

E. MARTIN ESTRADA United States Attorney DAVID M. HARRIS Chief, Civil Division RICHARD M. PARK Chief, Civil Rights Section MATTHEW J. BARRAGAN (Cal. Bar No. 283883) MARGARET M. CHEN (Cal. Bar No. 288294) Assistant United States Attorneys Federal Building, Suite 7516 300 North Los Angeles Street Los Angeles, California 90012 Telephone: (213) 894-2444 (Barragan) / -3148 (Chen) Facsimile: (213) 894-7819 E-mail: [email protected]

[email protected]

Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No.

Plaintiff, COMPLAINT

v.

FITNESS INTERNATIONAL, LLC D/B/A LA FITNESS,

Defendant.

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA alleges the following:

I. INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiff United States brings this action against Defendant Fitness

International, LLC d/b/a LA Fitness to enforce Title III of the Americans with

Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181–89, and its implementing regulation, 28

C.F.R. Part 36. Defendant is the largest chain of owner operated gym and fitness club

facilities in the United States with over 700 facilities.

2. Ensuring equitable and inclusive access to physical activity is crucial for

promoting health and well-being of all individuals, including those with disabilities. But

individuals with disabilities experienced disparities and harm because Defendant

operates inaccessible gym and fitness club facilities as detailed below.

3. Title III of the ADA prohibits discrimination against individuals on the

basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities,

privileges, advantages, and accommodations of places of public accommodation,

including gym and fitness facilities. 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181(7)(L), 12182(a); 28 C.F.R.

§ 36.201(a).

4. Defendant operates places of public accommodations and violates the ADA

by failing to ensure that its facilities:

a. give individuals with disabilities the opportunity to participate in or

benefit from their services and facilities, 42 U.S.C.

§ 12182(b)(1)(A)(i); 28 C.F.R. § 36.202(a);

b. remove architectural barriers in existing facilities where such removal

is readily achievable, 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(iv); 28 C.F.R.

§ 36.304(a);

c. ensure that facilities designed and constructed for first occupancy

after January 26, 1993, are readily accessible to and usable by

individuals with disabilities, 42 U.S.C. § 12183(a)(1); 28 C.F.R.

§ 36.401(c); 2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

d. maintain in operable working condition those features of facilities

and equipment that are required to be readily accessible to and usable

by individuals with disabilities, 28 C.F.R. § 36.211(a); and

e. not impose additional fees or surcharges to cover the costs of

measures necessary to provide individuals with disabilities with the

nondiscriminatory treatment required by the ADA, 42 U.S.C.

§ 12182(b)(2)(A)(i); 28 C.F.R. § 36.301(c).

5. In passing the ADA, Congress identified “the Nation’s proper goals”

regarding individuals with disabilities to include “equality of opportunity,” “independent

living” and “full participation.” 42 U.S.C. § 12101(a)(7). The ADA’s prohibition

against discrimination includes ensuring access to LA Fitness gym and fitness club

facilities and is essential to furthering the ADA’s purpose “to invoke the sweep of

congressional authority . . . to address the major areas of discrimination faced day-to-day

by people with disabilities.” 42 U.S.C. § 12101(b)(4).

6. The United States brings this action based on a determination that: (1)

Defendant has engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination and (2) Defendant

discriminated against a person or group of persons and that such discrimination raises an

issue of general public importance. The United States seeks declaratory and injunctive

relief, monetary damages, and a civil penalty against Defendant.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

7. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under 42 U.S.C.

§ 12188(b)(1)(B) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1345. The Court may grant declaratory

relief and further necessary or proper relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-02, and may

grant equitable relief, monetary damages, and a civil penalty pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 12188(b)(2).

8. Venue is proper in this Court because Defendant is a California limited

liability company that owns or operates gym and fitness club facilities in the United

States with its principal place of business in this District and a substantial part of the 3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District. 28 U.S.C. § 1391.

III. PARTIES

9. Plaintiff is the United States of America.

10. Defendant is Fitness International, LLC, d/b/a LA Fitness is a limited

liability company organized under the laws of California. Defendant owns or operates

gym and fitness club facilities that affect commerce in the United States. See

42 U.S.C. § 12181. Defendant is a public accommodation because it owns or operates

places of public accommodation—gymnasiums, health spas, or other places of exercise

or recreation—within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 12181(7)(L).

IV. ALLEGATIONS

11. Defendant is the largest chain of owner operated gym and fitness club

facilities in the United States with over 700 facilities.

12. Defendant engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination and

discriminated against a person or group of persons by failing to provide full and equal

enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations

of places of public accommodation, and that discrimination raises an issue of general

public importance.

13. Defendant denied an individual or group of individuals, on the basis of

disability, with the opportunity to participate in or benefit from a good, service, facility,

privilege, or accommodation.

14. Defendant fails to maintain in operable working condition those features of

facilities and equipment that are required to be readily accessible to and usable by

individuals with disabilities.

15. Defendant’s failure to maintain pool and spa lifts in operable working

condition has harmed Patron A, Patron B, Patron C, Patron D and other similarly

situated individuals with disabilities.

16. Patron A has multiple sclerosis and is substantially limited in one or more

major life activities or major bodily functions, including neurological function, operation

4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

of the central nervous system, and the ability to walk, and is an individual with a

disability. 42 U.S.C. §§ 12102(1), (2); 28 C.F.R. § 36.105(d)(2)(iii).

17. Since January 2020, Patron A has frequented several LA Fitness facilities to

swim for exercise. Swimming is essential for Patron A to manage her pain related to

Multiple Sclerosis and is critical to maintain her quality of life.

18. Patron A has encountered inoperable pool lifts at the LA Fitness locations

she frequents. Even when a pool lift appears to be working, Patron A has experienced

being stuck and dangling over the water, requiring assistance from LA Fitness

employees to exit the pool, and being unable to use the pool.

19. Defendant’s failure to provide operable pool lifts has also harmed Patron B

who has cerebral palsy and quadriplegia and is substantially limited in one or more

major life activities or major bodily functions, including neurological function and the

ability to walk, and is an individual with a disability. 42 U.S.C. §§ 12102(1), (2); 28

C.F.R. § 36.105(d)(2)(iii).

20. For several years, Patron B has frequented LA Fitness facilities to swim

several days a week, accompanied by his father, who is also a member. Swimming is the

only form of exercise available to Patron B. When the pool lift works, Patron B can

transfer himself out of the pool independently, but when the pool lift is not working, he

must crawl out of the pool and rely on others to help him transfer to his wheelchair.

Between early 2021 and early 2022, the pool lift was inoperable at the LA Fitness

facility that Patron B and his father frequented. During that period, Patron B was forced

to crawl out of the pool using the stairs, causing him physical discomfort and abrasions.

Upon crawling out of the pool, Patron B needed assistance from his father to get back

into his wheelchair. For years, Patron B’s father has notified LA Fitness facility and

corporate staff about the broken pool lifts, but these issues remain unresolved. LA

Fitness’s failure to fix broken pool lifts for extensive periods has caused Patron B

emotional distress.

21. In 2023, that location closed, and Patron B and his father began to frequent 5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

another LA Fitness location that, at first, lacked a working pool lift battery, and

eventually, had a broken pool lift. As recently as July 2024, that LA Fitness facility’s

pool lift remains inoperable and Patron B has to crawl out of the pool after swimming,

continuing to cause him emotional and physical discomfort.

22. Patron C had polio as a child and cannot stand or walk. She is substantially

limited in one or more major life activities or major bodily functions, including

neurological function, operation of the central nervous system, and the ability to walk,

and is an individual with a disability. 42 U.S.C. §§ 12102(1), (2); 28 C.F.R.

§ 36.105(d)(2)(iii).

23. Patron C has been a member of LA Fitness since 2007. She visits LA

Fitness to use weight machines and the jacuzzi. Patron C often cannot operate the

jacuzzi lift independently because the remote control, battery, or other lift parts are not

working. Patron C can access the jacuzzi without the lift, but needs the lift to get out of

the jacuzzi. When the remote control is broken, Patron C uses her cell phone to call the

LA Fitness front desk for staff to manually move the lift chair over the water so she can

get out of the jacuzzi. At times she cannot reach the front desk staff for assistance.

When this occurs, she feels extremely fearful that she will be stuck in the jacuzzi with no

means to get out. Patron C values being independent, and having to rely on gym staff to

help her use the facility’s equipment diminishes her sense of independence.

24. Defendant fails to maintain elevators in operable working condition.

25. Defendant’s failure to provide operable elevators harmed Patron D and

other similarly situated individuals with disabilities.

26. Patron D has chronic osteoarthritis in both knees and is substantially limited

in one or more major life activities or major bodily functions, including the abilities to

climb stairs and walk, and is an individual with a disability. 42 U.S.C. §§ 12102(1), (2);

28 C.F.R. § 36.105(d)(2)(iii).

27. Patron D first joined LA Fitness in 2013 to exercise regularly to recover

from surgery. Patron D’s physician recommended walking in the pool as exercise. He 6

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

rejoined in 2022 once the LA Fitness near his home reopened after shutting down

temporarily because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Patron D rejoined to use the pool at

the LA Fitness facility to exercise. About a month after rejoining LA Fitness, Patron D

observed that the elevator from the street level to the facility entrance was broken.

Patron D cannot climb the stairs to the entrance because of chronic osteoarthritis. Patron

D repeatedly asked about repair of the elevator in 2022 and 2023. Although he was

informed several times that the elevator would be fixed “next month,” the elevator has

remained broken. Patron D cannot use the pools at other LA Fitness facilities because

they are too deep to walk in. As a result, Patron D has been unable to exercise at an LA

Fitness facility. As of late September 2024, the elevator is working.

28. Defendant fails to remove architectural barriers in existing facilities where

such removal is readily achievable.

29. Defendant fails to ensure that facilities designed and constructed facilities

for first occupancy after January 26, 1993, are readily accessible to and usable by

individuals with disabilities.

30. Defendant’s failure to provide accessible facilities harmed Patron A, also

referenced above, as well as other similarly situated individuals with disabilities.

31. Along with experiencing inoperable pool lifts, Patron A has experienced

barriers to using the accessible shower after she swims. Patron A went to an LA Fitness

facility where the shower bench in a designated accessible shower was neither centered,

nor close enough to the grab bar. Even after reporting the barrier, the bench remained

inaccessible for months and was eventually fixed in May 2023.

32. At another LA Fitness facility, Patron A experienced barriers to accessing a

different designated accessible shower where the on/off switch and temperature controls

were out of reach from the shower bench. Rather than correcting the bench location,

Defendant installed a handheld showerhead with an off/on switch, but no temperature

control. These barriers made it difficult for Patron A to shower at LA Fitness locations.

33. Multiple Defendant facilities in Dallas-Ft. Worth, Texas had deviations

7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

from the 1991 ADA Standards for Accessible Design (28 C.F.R. pt. 36, appendix D) and

the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design (28 C.F.R. pt. 36, subpart D; 2004

ADAAG at 36 C.F.R. part 1191, appendices B and D), including:

a. reach range violations, including toilet seat dispensers, wall hooks,

AED boxes, sanitizer, and soap dispensers and shower controls.

b. protrusions, including mounted wall lockers, pool emergency phones,

paper towel dispensers, and the front desks.

c. barriers in the showers including grab bars over the shower seat,

wrong height, and seat of shower, incorrect location for controls,

including over grab bar; no on/off for handheld shower, roll-in

shower less than 60 inches wide, transfer shower less than 36 inches

wide, slope at maneuvering clearance at the shower entry, incomplete

or insufficient height for grab bars.

d. barriers to access in locker rooms, including inaccessible lockers,

insufficient bench back support, and no pipe insulation.

e. barriers to access in the water closets, including tissue dispenser

location, no self-closing doors in the accessible stalls, insufficient

maneuvering clearance, and incorrect side grab bar locations.

f. violations at the pool deck, including pool lifts that were not

operational, spa lifts that were not operational, excessive slopes at the

pool decks, and a change of level at the pool lift.

g. barriers at doo

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.