Posted: April 24th, 2025

2

Assignment Content

Question 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 you: Disability, Educational Opportunities, Employment Litigation, Housing and Civil Enforcement; Immigrant and Employee Rights, Special Litigation, or Voting. Download a civil complaint. Summarize the complaint using the four elements of a complaint identified in the text. Upload both the complaint in pdf format and your summary in Microsoft Word in the assignment link.

Your writing assignment should be prepared using Microsoft Word. Use 12 point times new roman font, double space with 1 inch margins.

Elements of a complaint
1. Identifies the plaintiffs and defendants in the lawsuit,
and describes their status and capacity to sue and be
sued
2. Contains a statement showing that the court in which it
is filed has proper jurisdiction and venue
3. Describes the factual basis for the lawsuit
4. Requests or demands some relief from the court

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., –

CON
Washington, D.C. 20530
Telephone: (202) 598-9620
Facsimile: (202) 305-9775
Email: Anna.Bobrow@usdoj.gov

Cheryl.Rost@usdoj.gov
Felicia.Sadler@usdoj.gov

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) 894-781

E-mail: Matthew.Barragan@usdoj.gov

Margaret.Chen@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff
United States of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No.

Plaintiff,

COMPLAINT

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

Defendant.

mailto:Anna.Bobrow@usdoj.gov

mailto:Cheryl.Rost@usdoj.gov

mailto:Felicia.Sadler@usdoj.gov

mailto:Matthew.Barragan@usdoj.gov

mailto:Margaret.Chen@usdoj.gov

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);

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

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

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

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 20

to exercise regularly to recover

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

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

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

the 20

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 doors, including obstructed maneuvering clearance at the

interior door and excessive thresholds.

h. barriers to access in saunas, including incorrect bench size and

height, change in level at the entry door threshold, change in level at

the floor mats, less than 32” of clear width at the door, and no turning

space within the sauna.

i. barriers to operable parts, including inaccessible wall lockers, sauna
8

controls, emergency phone boxes, and phones without volume

control.

j. sign violations, including wrong height, no braille, and not on latch

side.

k. barriers to drinking fountains, including insufficient knee clearance

and spout higher than 36 inches; an elevator that was out of service;

instances with no accessible seating in the lounge area.

l. elements limiting the accessible interior route.

m. fitness equipment stations that lacked sufficient maneuvering

clearance.

34. Defendant has imposed impermissible surcharges on patrons with

disabilities and their associates to cover the costs of measures, including barrier removal,

alternatives to barrier removal, and reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or

procedures, that are required to provide those individuals with nondiscriminatory

treatment under the ADA, including by charging a patron an additional fee to receive

assistance from his caretaker and using equipment bought by a patron’s associate for

barrier removal. These surcharges have harmed individuals with disabilities.

35. Defendant imposed a surcharge on Patron B’s father. After waiting almost

a year for LA Fitness to fix the broken pool lift battery in 2022, Patron B’s father spent

about $500 on a battery and charging case for use at an LA Fitness facility. After that

facility closed, Patron B and his father began patronizing a different facility without a

working pool lift battery, and Patron B used the battery and charging case at that facility

until the pool lift broke in late 2023.

V. CAUSE OF ACTION

VIOLATIONS OF TITLE III OF THE ADA

36. The preceding paragraphs are re-alleged and incorporated by reference as if

fully stated.

37. Defendant discriminated against individuals, on the basis of disability, in

the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or

accommodations in violation of Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a) and 28

C.F.R. § 36.201(a).

38. 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, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(1)(A)(i) and 28

C.F.R. § 36.202(a).

39. Defendant failed to remove architectural barriers in existing facilities where

such removal is readily achievable. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(iv) and 28 C.F.R.

§ 36.304.

40. Defendant failed to 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) and 28 C.F.R. § 36.401(c).

41. Defendant failed 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. 28 C.F.R. § 36.211(a).

42. Defendant imposed a surcharge on aggrieved individuals with disabilities to

cover the costs of measures that were required to provide them the nondiscriminatory

treatment required by Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(i) and 28 C.F.R.

§ 36.301(c).

43. Defendant violated 42 U.S.C. § 12188(b)(1)(B) and 28 C.F.R. § 36.503 by

engaging in a pattern or practice of discrimination against individuals on the basis of

disability.

44. Defendant’s discriminatory acts raise an issue of general public importance

under 42 U.S.C. § 12188(b)(1)(B)(ii).

45. As a result of Defendant’s discriminatory conduct, the individuals as

alleged in this complaint and other similarly situated individuals suffered harm,

emotional distress, loss of independence, humiliation, and embarrassment. They and

others who were the victims of Defendant’s discriminatory practices are aggrieved

individuals under 42 U.S.C. § 12188(b)(2)(B) and 28 C.F.R. § 36.503.

VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

46. Grant judgment for the United States and declare that Defendant violated

Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-89, and its implementing regulation, 28 C.F.R.

Part 36;

47. Enjoin Defendant, its officers, agents, employees, and all others in concert

or participation with it, from engaging in discrimination against individuals with

disabilities, and specifically from violating Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-89,

and its

implementing regulation, 28 C.F.R. Part 36;

48. Order Defendant, its officers, agents, employees, and all others in concert or

participation with it, to:

a. Modify its policies, practices, and procedures to comply with the

requirements of Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181–89, and its

implementing regulation, 28 C.F.R. Part 36;

b. Remove architectural barriers in existing facilities where such

removal is readily achievable. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(iv); 28

C.F.R. § 36.304;

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);

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;

e. Cease imposition of surcharges on individuals with disabilities or

their associates to cover the costs of measures, such as the provision

of auxiliary aids, barrier removal, alternatives to barrier removal, and

reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures, that are

required to provide those individuals with the nondiscriminatory

treatment required by the ADA or its implementing regulation. 42

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

f. Take such affirmative steps as may be needed to restore, as nearly as

practicable, all aggrieved individuals to the position that they would

have been in but for Defendant’s conduct;

g. Award monetary damages, including compensatory damages for

emotional distress, to aggrieved individuals, under 42 U.S.C.

§ 12188(b)(2)(B), for injuries suffered as the result of Defendant’s

violation of Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181–89, and its

implementing regulation, 28 C.F.R. Part 36;

h. Assess a civil penalty against Defendant in the maximum amount

authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 12188(b)(2)(C), to vindicate the public

interest; and

i. Order such other appropriate relief as justice may require.

VII. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff United States demands a trial by jury.

Respectfully submitted this 8th day of October 2024.
E. MARTIN ESTRADA KRISTEN CLARKE
United States Attorney Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights
DAVID M. HARRIS REBECCA B. BOND
Chief, Civil Division Chief, Disability Rights Section
RICHARD M. PARK KEVIN KIJEWSKI
Chief, Civil Rights Section Deputy Chief, Disability Rights Section

/s/ Cheryl Rost/s/ Margaret M. Chen
MATTHEW J. BARRAGAN ANNA BOBROW
MARGARET M. CHEN CHERYL ROST
Assistant United States Attorneys FELICIA SADLER

Trial Attorneys, Disability Rights Section

Attorneys for Plaintiff
United States of America

I. INTRODUCTION

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

III. PARTIES

IV. ALLEGATIONS

V. CAUSE OF ACTION VIOLATIONS OF TITLE III OF THE ADA

VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

VII. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away

Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.

Calculate the price of your order

Type of paper needed:

Pages:

You will get a personal manager and a discount.

Academic level:

We'll send you the first draft for approval by at

Total price:

$0.00