(Declaratory Relief)  (on behalf of Plaintiff and the Class)  110. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations as if set  forth fully herein.  111.  An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between the parties in that  Plaintiff contends, and is informed and believes that Defendant denies, that Brookstone.com  contains access barriers denying blind customers the full and equal access to the goods, services  and facilities of Brookstone.com and by extension Brookstone Stores, which Brookstone owns,  26  operates, and/or controls, fails to comply with applicable laws including, but not limited to, Title  III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12182, et seq., N.Y. Exec. Law § 296, et  seq., and N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107, et seq. prohibiting discrimination against the  blind.  112.  A judicial declaration is necessary and appropriate at this time in order that each  of the parties may know their respective rights and duties and act accordingly.  WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as set forth below.  (Violation of New York City Human Rights Law,  N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-102, et seq.)  (on behalf of Plaintiff and New York subclass)   (Violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181, et seq. — Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act)  (on behalf of Plaintiff and the Class)   (Violation of New York State Civil Rights Law, NY CLS Civ R,  Article 4 (CLS Civ R § 40 et seq.)  (on behalf of Plaintiff and New York subclass)   (Violation of New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law,   Article 15 (Executive Law § 292 et seq.)  (on behalf of Plaintiff and New York subclass)   21.  Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, seeks certification  of the following nationwide class pursuant to Rule 23(a) and 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil  Procedure: “all legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted to access  Brookstone.com and as a result have been denied access to the enjoyment of goods and services  offered in Brookstone Stores, during the relevant statutory period.”    22.  Plaintiff seeks certification of the following New York subclass pursuant to  Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(a), 23(b)(2), and, alternatively, 23(b)(3): “all legally blind individuals in New  York State who have attempted to access Brookstone.com and as a result have been denied  7  access to the enjoyment of goods and services offered in Brookstone Stores, during the relevant  statutory period.”   23.  There are hundreds of thousands of visually impaired persons in New York State.  There are approximately 8.1 million people in the United States who are visually impaired. Thus,  the persons in the class are so numerous that joinder of all such persons is impractical and the  disposition of their claims in a class action is a benefit to the parties and to the Court.   24.  This case arises out of Defendant’s policy and practice of maintaining an  inaccessible website denying blind persons access to the goods and services of Brookstone.com  and Brookstone Stores. Due to Defendant’s policy and practice of failing to remove access barriers,  blind persons have been and are being denied full and equal access to independently browse, select  and shop on Brookstone.com and by extension the goods and services offered through Defendant’s  website to Brookstone Stores.   25.  There are common questions of law and fact common to the class, including without  limitation, the following:  a.  Whether Brookstone.com is a “public accommodation” under the ADA;  b.  Whether Brookstone.com is a “place or provider of public accommodation”  under the laws of New York;  c.  Whether Defendant through its website Brookstone.com denies the full and  equal enjoyment of its goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or  accommodations to people with visual disabilities in violation of the ADA;  and  d.  Whether Defendant through its website Brookstone.com denies the full and  equal enjoyment of its goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or  8  accommodations to people with visual disabilities in violation of the laws of  New York.   26.  The claims of the named Plaintiff are typical of those of the class. The class,  similarly to the Plaintiff, are severely visually impaired or otherwise blind, and claim that  Brookstone has violated the ADA, and/or the laws of New York by failing to update or remove  access barriers on the website, Brookstone.com, so it can be independently accessible to the class  of people who are legally blind.   27.  Plaintiff will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of the  members of the Class because Plaintiff has retained and is represented by counsel competent and  experienced in complex class action litigation, and because Plaintiff has no interests antagonistic  to the members of the class. Class certification of the claims is appropriate pursuant to Fed. R. Civ  P. 23(b)(2) because Defendant has acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the  Class, making appropriate both declaratory and injunctive relief with respect to Plaintiff and the  Class as a whole.   28.  Alternatively, class certification is appropriate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3)  because questions of law and fact common to Class members clearly predominate over questions  affecting only individual class members, and because a class action is superior to other available  methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this litigation.   29.  Judicial economy will be served by maintenance of this lawsuit as a class action in  that it is likely to avoid the burden that would be otherwise placed upon the judicial system by the  filing of numerous similar suits by people with visual disabilities throughout the United States.   30.  References to Plaintiff shall be deemed to include the named Plaintiff and each  member of the class, unless otherwise indicated.  9  31.  Brookstone operates Brookstone Stores, which provide fitness accessories, games,  toys and gifts. The company currently operates currently twelve Brookstone Stores in New York  state.   32.  Brookstone.com is a service and benefit offered by Brookstone and Brookstone  Stores throughout the United States, including New York State. Brookstone.com is owned,  controlled and/or operated by Brookstone.   33.  Brookstone.com is a commercial website that offers products and services for  online sale and home delivery that are available in Brookstone Stores. The online store allows the  user to browse items; find store locations; and perform a variety of other functions.   34.  Among the features offered by Brookstone.com are the following:  (a)  a store locator, allowing persons who wish to shop at Brookstone to learn its  location, hours of operation, and phone numbers;  (b)  an online store, allowing customers to make a purchase and select for delivery  or pickup at a Brookstone Stores;  (c)  information about Brookstone’ company privacy policy;  (d)  information about Brookstone’ return policy;  (e)  sale of many of the products and services available at Brookstone Stores in  New York State.   35.  This case arises out of Brookstone’ policy and practice of denying the blind access  to Brookstone.com, including the goods and services offered by Brookstone Stores through  Brookstone.com. Due to Brookstone’ failure and refusal to remove access barriers to  Brookstone.com, blind individuals have been and are being denied equal access to Brookstone  10  Stores, as well as to the numerous goods, services and benefits offered to the public through  Brookstone.com.   36.  Brookstone denies the blind access to goods, services and information made  available through Brookstone.com by preventing them from freely navigating Brookstone.com.   37.  The Internet has become a significant source of information for conducting business  and for doing everyday activities such as shopping, banking, etc., for sighted and blind persons.   38.  The blind access websites by using keyboards in conjunction with screen-reading  software which vocalizes visual information on a computer screen. Except for a blind person  whose residual vision is still sufficient to use magnification, screen access software provides the  only method by which a blind person can independently access the Internet. Unless websites are  designed to allow for use in this manner, blind persons are unable to fully access Internet websites  and the information, products and services contained therein.   39.  There are well-established guidelines for making websites accessible to blind  people. These guidelines have been in place for at least several years and have been followed  successfully by other large business entities in making their websites accessible. The Web  Accessibility Initiative (WAI), a project of the World Wide Web Consortium which is the leading  standards organization of the Web, has developed guidelines for website accessibility. The federal  government has also promulgated website accessibility standards under Section 508 of the  Rehabilitation Act. These guidelines are readily available via the Internet, so that a business  designing a website can easily access them. These guidelines recommend several basic  components for making websites accessible, including, but not limited to: ensuring that all  functions can be performed using a keyboard and not just a mouse; ensuring that image maps are  11  accessible, and adding headings so that blind people can easily navigate the site. Without these  very basic components a website will be inaccessible to a blind person using a screen reader.   40.  Brookstone.com contains access barriers that prevent free and full use by Plaintiff  and blind persons using keyboards and screen reading software. These barriers are pervasive and  include, but are not limited to: lack of alt-text on graphics, inaccessible forms, the lack of adequate  prompting and labeling; lack of navigation links; the denial of keyboard access; and the  requirement that transactions be performed solely with a mouse.   41.  Alternative text (“Alt-text”) is invisible code embedded beneath a graphical image  on a website. Web accessibility requires that alt-text be coded with each picture so that a screen  reader can speak the alternative text while a sighted user sees the picture. Alt-text does not change  the visual presentation except that it appears as a text pop-up when the mouse moves over the  picture. There are many important pictures on Brookstone.com that lack a text equivalent. The  lack of alt-text on these graphics prevents screen readers from accurately vocalizing a description  of the graphics. (Screen readers detect and vocalize alt-text to provide a description of the image  to a blind computer user.) As a result, Plaintiff and blind Brookstone customers are unable to  determine what is on the website, browse the site, investigate Brookstone’ menu and/or make any  purchases.   42.  Similarly, Brookstone.com lacks accessible forms including forms that allow  customers to locate and choose products as well as specify the size, fit and color of certain items.  Due to the complete lack of accessibility of these forms, blind customers cannot choose and  purchase the products they want since they are stopped from doing so. In particular, blind  customers are unable to specify the color and/or size of the product desired because the forms on  Brookstone.com do not indicate its purpose. As blind customers are prevented from adding items  12  to their carts, they are essentially prevented from purchasing any item on Brookstone.com which  requires this information.   43.  Brookstone.com also lacks accessible forms. Quantity boxes allow customers to  specify the quantity of certain items. On Brookstone.com, blind customers are unable to select  specific quantity because the screen reader doesn’t indicate the function of the box. As a result,  blind customers are denied access to the quantity box. Therefore, blind customers are unsuccessful  in adding products into their shopping carts and are essentially prevented from purchasing items  on Brookstone.com.   44.  Moreover, the lack of navigation links on Brookstone website makes attempting to  navigate through Brookstone.com even more time consuming and confusing for Plaintiff and blind  consumers.   45.  Brookstone.com requires the use of a mouse to complete a transaction. Plaintiff was  unable to move forward in his transaction because he did not specify collar type. However, without  the use of a mouse Plaintiff was unable to specify this option. Yet, it is a fundamental tenet of web  accessibility that for a web page to be accessible to Plaintiff and blind people, it must be possible  for the user to interact with the page using only the keyboard. Indeed, Plaintiff and blind users  cannot use a mouse because manipulating the mouse is a visual activity of moving the mouse  pointer from one visual spot on the page to another. Thus, Brookstone.com’s inaccessible design,  which requires the use of a mouse to complete a transaction, denies Plaintiff and blind customers  the ability to independently navigate Brookstone.com.   46.  Due to Brookstone.com’s inaccessibility, Plaintiff and blind customers must in turn  spend time, energy, and/or money to make their purchases at a Brookstone stores. Some blind  13  customers may require a driver to get to the store or require assistance in navigating the store. By  contrast, if Brookstone.com was accessible, a blind person could independently investigate  products and programs and make purchases via the Internet as sighted individuals can and do.  According to WCAG 2 Guideline 2.4.1, a mechanism is necessary to bypass blocks  of content that are repeated on multiple webpages because requiring users to extensively tab before  reaching the main content is an unacceptable barrier to accessing the website. Plaintiff must tab  through every menu option and footer on Defendant’s website in an attempt to reach the desired  service.  Thus, Brookstone.com’s inaccessible design, which requires the use of a mouse to  complete a transaction, denies Plaintiff and blind customers the ability to independently make  purchases on Brookstone.com.   47.   Brookstone.com thus contains access barriers which deny full and equal access to  Plaintiff, who would otherwise use Brookstone.com and who would otherwise be able to fully  and equally enjoy the benefits and services of Brookstone Stores in New York State.   48.  Plaintiff VICTOR ANDREWS has made numerous attempts to complete a  transaction on Brookstone.com, most recently in June 2017, but was unable to do so independently  because of the many access barriers on Defendant’s website. Additionally, Plaintiff was unable to  find the location on Defendant’s website, preventing him from going into the physical location to  complete a reservation. These access barriers have caused Brookstone.com to be inaccessible to,  and not independently usable by, blind and visually impaired individuals.   49.  Plaintiff VICTOR ANDREWS experienced many barriers in his attempt to access  Brookstone.com. For instance, the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) are part of a  series of web accessibility guidelines published by Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) of the  World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), which are the main international standards organization for  14  the Internet. Plaintiff VICTOR ANDREWS was completely blocked from online ordering since  Brookstone.com is barely accessible. Brookstone has failed to adhere to the recommendations of  many of these guidelines such as,    a. WCAG 2.1 recommending businesses to make all functionality available from a  keyboard since Brookstone.com requires the visual activity of mouse manipulation  to complete a purchase.    b. WCAG 2.4 recommending businesses to provide help for users to navigate, find  content and determine where they are on the website due to Brookstone.com’s lack  of links and headings.    c. WCAG 4.1 recommending businesses to maximize compatibility with current and  future user agents, including assistive technologies, for the reasons stated above.   50.  As described above, Plaintiff has actual knowledge of the fact that Defendant’s  website, Brookstone.com contains access barriers causing the website to be inaccessible, and not  independently usable by, blind and visually impaired individuals.   51.  These barriers to access have denied Plaintiff full and equal access to, and  enjoyment of, the goods, benefits and services of Brookstone.com and Brookstone Stores.   52.  Brookstone engaged in acts of intentional discrimination, including but not limited  to the following policies or practices:   (a)  constructed and maintained a website that is inaccessible to blind class  members with knowledge of the discrimination; and/or  (b)  constructed and maintained a website that is sufficiently intuitive and/or  obvious that is inaccessible to blind class members; and/or  (c)  failed to take actions to correct these access barriers in the face of  15  substantial harm and discrimination to blind class members.   53.  Brookstone utilizes standards, criteria or methods of administration that have the  effect of discriminating or perpetuating the discrimination of others.  54.  Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations  as if set forth fully herein.   55.  Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a),  provides that “No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and  equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any  place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place  of public accommodation.” Title III also prohibits an entity from “[u]tilizing standards or criteria  or methods of administration that have the effect of discriminating on the basis of disability.” 42  U.S.C. § 12181(b)(2)(D)(I).   56.  Brookstone Stores located in New York State are sales establishments and public  accommodations within the definition of 42 U.S.C. § 12181(7)(E). Brookstone.com is a service,  privilege or advantage of Brookstone Stores. Brookstone is a service that is by and integrated with  these stores.   57.  Defendant is subject to Title III of the ADA because they own and operate  Brookstone Stores.   58.  Under Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(1)(A)(I) it is unlawful  discrimination to deny individuals with disabilities or a class of individuals with disabilities the  opportunity to participate in or benefit from the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages,  16  or accommodations of an entity.   59.  Under Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(1)(A)(II), it is unlawful  discrimination to deny individuals with disabilities or a class of individuals with disabilities an  opportunity to participate in or benefit from the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages,  or accommodation, which is equal to the opportunities afforded to other individuals.   60.  Specifically, under Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(II), unlawful  discrimination includes, among other things, “a failure to make reasonable modifications in  policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford such goods,  services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to individuals with disabilities,  unless the entity can demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally alter the  nature of such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations.”    61.  In addition, under Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(III), unlawful  discrimination also includes, among other things, “a failure to take such steps as may be necessary  to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise  treated differently than other individuals because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services,  unless the entity can demonstrate that taking such steps would fundamentally alter the nature of  the good, service, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation being offered or would result  in an undue burden.”   62.  There are readily available, well established guidelines on the Internet for making  websites accessible to the blind and visually impaired. These guidelines have been followed by  other large business entities in making their website accessible, including but not limited to:  ensuring that all functions can be performed using a keyboard. Incorporating the basic  components to make their website accessible would neither fundamentally alter the nature of  17  Defendant’s business nor result in an undue burden to Defendant.   63.  The acts alleged herein constitute violations of Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §  12101 et seq., and the regulations promulgated thereunder. Patrons of Brookstone Stores who are  blind have been denied full and equal access to Brookstone.com, have not been provided services  that are provided to other patrons who are not disabled, and/or have been provided services that  are inferior to the services provided to non-disabled patrons.    64.  Defendant has failed to take any prompt and equitable steps to remedy their  discriminatory conduct. These violations are ongoing.    65.  As such, Defendant discriminate, and will continue in the future to discriminate  against Plaintiff and members of the proposed class and subclass on the basis of disability in the full  and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, accommodations and/or  opportunities of Brookstone.com and Brookstone Stores in violation of Title III of the Americans  with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181 et seq. and/or its implementing regulations.   66.  Unless the Court enjoins Defendant from continuing to engage in these unlawful  practices, Plaintiff and members of the proposed class and subclass will continue to suffer irreparable  harm.   67.  The actions of Defendant were and are in violation of the ADA and therefore  Plaintiff invokes his statutory right to injunctive relief to remedy the discrimination.   68.  Plaintiff is also entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.     69.  Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12188 and the remedies, procedures, and rights set forth  and incorporated therein Plaintiff prays for judgment as set forth below.  18  70.  Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations as  though fully set forth herein.   71.  N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(2)(a) provides that it is “an unlawful discriminatory  practice for any person, being the owner, lessee, proprietor, manager, superintendent,  agent or employee of any place of public accommodation … because of the … disability  of any person, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from or deny to such person any  of the accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges thereof.”   72.  Brookstone Stores located in New York State are sales establishments and public  accommodations within the definition of N.Y. Exec. Law § 292(9). Brookstone.com is a service,  privilege or advantage of Brookstone Stores. Brookstone.com is a service that is by and integrated  with these stores.   73.  Defendant is subject to New York Human Rights Law because they own and  operate the Brookstone Stores and Brookstone.com. Defendant is a person within the meaning of  N.Y. Exec. Law § 292(1).   74.  Defendant is violating N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(2)(a) in refusing to update or  remove access barriers to Brookstone.com, causing Brookstone.com and the services  integrated with Brookstone Stores to be completely inaccessible to the blind. This  inaccessibility denies blind patrons full and equal access to the facilities, goods and services that  Defendant makes available to the non-disabled public.   19   75.  Specifically, under N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(2)(c)(I), unlawful discriminatory  practice includes, among other things, “a refusal to make reasonable modifications in  policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford facilities,  privileges, advantages or accommodations to individuals with disabilities, unless such  person can demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally alter the  nature of such facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations.”   76.  In addition, under N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(2)(c)(II), unlawful discriminatory  practice also includes, “a refusal to take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no  individual with a disability is excluded or denied services because of the absence of auxiliary  aids and services, unless such person can demonstrate that taking such steps would  fundamentally alter the nature of the facility, privilege, advantage or accommodation being  offered or would result in an undue burden.”   77.  There are readily available, well established guidelines on the Internet for making  websites accessible to the blind and visually impaired. These guidelines have been followed by  other large business entities in making their website accessible, including but not limited to:  ensuring that all functions can be performed using a keyboard. Incorporating the basic  components to make their website accessible would neither fundamentally alter the nature of  Defendant’s business nor result in an undue burden to Defendant.   78.  Defendant’s actions constitute willful intentional discrimination against the class  on the basis of a disability in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exc. Law  § 296(2) in that Defendant has:   (a)  constructed and maintained a website that is inaccessible to blind class  members with knowledge of the discrimination; and/or  20  (b)  constructed and maintained a website that is sufficiently intuitive and/or  obvious that is inaccessible to blind class members; and/or  (c)  failed to take actions to correct these access barriers in the face of  substantial harm and discrimination to blind class members.   79.  Defendant has failed to take any prompt and equitable steps to remedy their  discriminatory conduct. These violations are ongoing.   80.  As such, Defendant discriminates, and will continue in the future to discriminate  against Plaintiff and members of the proposed class and subclass on the basis of disability in the full  and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, accommodations and/or  opportunities of Brookstone.com and Brookstone Stores under § 296(2) et seq. and/or its  implementing regulations. Unless the Court enjoins Defendant from continuing to engage in  these unlawful practices, Plaintiff and members of the subclass will continue to suffer irreparable  harm.   81.  The actions of Defendant were and are in violation of New York State Human  Rights Law and therefore Plaintiff invokes his right to injunctive relief to remedy the  discrimination.   82.  Plaintiff is also entitled to compensatory damages, as well as civil penalties and  fines pursuant to N.Y. Exc. Law § 297(4)(c) et seq. for each and every offense.   83.  Plaintiff is also entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.   84.  Pursuant to N.Y. Exec. Law § 297 and the remedies, procedures, and rights set forth  and incorporated therein Plaintiff prays for judgment as set forth below.   21  85.  Plaintiff served notice thereof upon the attorney general as required by N.Y.  Civil Rights Law § 41.    86.  Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations as  though fully set forth herein.   87.  N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 40 provides that “all persons within the jurisdiction  of this state shall be entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and  privileges of any places of public accommodations, resort or amusement, subject only to the  conditions and limitations established by law and applicable alike to all persons. No persons,  being the owner, lessee, proprietor, manager, superintendent, agent, or employee of any such  place shall directly or indirectly refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person any of the  accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges thereof …”     88.  N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 40-c(2) provides that “no person because of …  disability, as such term is defined in section two hundred ninety-two of executive law,  be subjected to any discrimination in his or her civil rights, or to any harassment, as  defined in section 240.25 of the penal law, in the exercise thereof, by any other person  or by any firm, corporation or institution, or by the state or any agency or subdivision”   89.  Brookstone Stores located in New York State are sales establishments and public  accommodations within the definition of N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 40-c(2). Brookstone.com is a  service, privilege or advantage of Brookstone Stores. Brookstone.com is a service that is by and  integrated with these stores.  22   90.  Defendant is subject to New York Civil Rights Law because they own and operate  Brookstone Stores and Brookstone.com. Defendant is a person within the meaning of N.Y. Civil  Law § 40-c(2).   91.  Defendant is violating N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 40-c(2) in refusing to update or  remove access barriers to Brookstone.com, causing Brookstone.com and the services  integrated with Brookstone Stores to be completely inaccessible to the blind. This  inaccessibility denies blind patrons full and equal access to the facilities, goods and services that  Defendant makes available to the non-disabled public.    92.  There are readily available, well established guidelines on the Internet for making  websites accessible to the blind and visually impaired. These guidelines have been followed by  other large business entities in making their website accessible, including but not limited to:  ensuring that all functions can be performed using a keyboard. Incorporating the basic  components to make their website accessible would neither fundamentally alter the nature of  Defendant’s business nor result in an undue burden to Defendant.   93.  In addition, N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 41 states that “any corporation which shall  violate any of the provisions of sections forty, forty-a, forty-b or forty two … shall for each  and every violation thereof be liable to a penalty of not less than one hundred dollars nor  more than five hundred dollars, to be recovered by the person aggrieved thereby…”   94.  Specifically, under NY Civ Rights Law § 40-d, “any person who shall violate any  of the provisions of the foregoing section, or subdivision three of section 240.30 or section 240.31  of the penal law, or who shall aid or incite the violation of any of said provisions shall for each  and every violation thereof be liable to a penalty of not less than one hundred dollars nor more  than five hundred dollars, to be recovered by the person aggrieved thereby in any court of  23  competent jurisdiction in the county in which the defendant shall reside …”   95.  Defendant has failed to take any prompt and equitable steps to remedy their  discriminatory conduct. These violations are ongoing.   96.  As such, Defendant discriminates, and will continue in the future to discriminate  against Plaintiff and members of the proposed class on the basis of disability are being directly or  indirectly refused, withheld from, or denied the accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges  thereof in § 40 et seq. and/or its implementing regulations.    97.  Plaintiff is entitled to compensatory damages of five hundred dollars per instance,  as well as civil penalties and fines pursuant to N.Y. Civil Law § 40 et seq. for each and every offense.  98.  Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations as if set  forth fully herein.   99.  N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107(4)(a) provides that “It shall be an unlawful  discriminatory practice for any person, being the owner, lessee, proprietor, manager,  superintendent, agent or employee of any place or provider of public accommodation, because  of … disability … directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from or deny to such person, any of  the accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges thereof.”   100. Brookstone Stores located in New York State are sales establishments and public  accommodations within the definition of N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-102(9).  Brookstone.com is a service, privilege or advantage of Brookstone Stores. Brookstone.com is a  service that is by and integrated with these stores.  101.  Defendant is subject to City Law because they own and operate Brookstone Stores  24  and Brookstone.com. Defendant is a person within the meaning of N.Y.C. Administrative Code  § 8-102(1).  102.  Defendant is violating N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107(4)(a) in refusing to  update or remove access barriers to Brookstone.com, causing Brookstone.com and the  services integrated with Brookstone Stores to be completely inaccessible to the blind. This  inaccessibility denies blind patrons full and equal access to the facilities, goods, and services  that Defendant makes available to the non-disabled public. Specifically, Defendant is required  to “make reasonable accommodation to the needs of persons with disabilities … any person  prohibited by the provisions of [§ 8-107 et seq.] from discriminating on the basis of disability  shall make reasonable accommodation to enable a person with a disability to … enjoy the right  or rights in question provided that the disability is known or should have been known by the  covered entity.” N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107(15)(a).  103.  Defendant’s actions constitute willful intentional discrimination against the class  on the basis of a disability in violation of the N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107(4)(a) and § 8- 107(15)(a) in that Defendant has:   (d)  constructed and maintained a website that is inaccessible to blind class  members with knowledge of the discrimination; and/or  (e)  constructed and maintained a website that is sufficiently intuitive and/or  obvious that is inaccessible to blind class members; and/or  (f)  failed to take actions to correct these access barriers in the face of  substantial harm and discrimination to blind class members.  104.  Defendant has failed to take any prompt and equitable steps to remedy their  discriminatory conduct. These violations are ongoing.  25  105.  As such, Defendant discriminates, and will continue in the future to discriminate  against Plaintiff and members of the proposed class and subclass on the basis of disability in the full  and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, accommodations  and/or opportunities of Brookstone.com and Brookstone Stores under § 8-107(4)(a) and/or its  implementing regulations. Unless the Court enjoins Defendant from continuing to engage in  these unlawful practices, Plaintiff and members of the subclass will continue to suffer irreparable  harm.  106.  The actions of Defendant were and are in violation of City law and therefore  Plaintiff invokes his right to injunctive relief to remedy the discrimination.  107.  Plaintiff is also entitled to compensatory damages, as well as civil penalties and fines  under N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-120(8) and § 8-126(a) for each offense.  108.  Plaintiff is also entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.  109.  Pursuant to N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-120 and § 8-126 and the remedies,  procedures, and rights set forth and incorporated therein Plaintiff prays for judgment as set forth  below. 