Federal Court Certifies Injunctive Class but Rejects Damages Subclass in Ralph Lauren Web Accessibility Case

On July 9, 2026, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California issued an order ruling on motions to exclude expert testimony and a motion for class certification in an accessibility lawsuit brought against Ralph Lauren Corporation.

The court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiff's motion for class certification. While the court certified a nationwide class seeking injunctive relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), it refused to certify a California subclass seeking statutory damages under the Unruh Civil Rights Act.

The Class Certification Decision

The lawsuit was brought by a legally blind plaintiff who uses screen-reading software and alleged that Ralph Lauren failed to make its website accessible, hindering equal access to its physical store locations. The plaintiff alleged barriers including improperly labeled links, buttons, and store-locator features.

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2), the court certified a nationwide injunctive class defined as:

• All legally blind individuals who have attempted to access the defendant's website using screen-reading software from January 2022 up to and including final judgment in this action.

The court determined that an indivisible injunction requiring the website to comply with accessibility standards—such as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)—would remedy the alleged harm for the entire class.

However, the court denied certification of a California damages subclass under Rule 23(b)(3). Under California's Unruh Civil Rights Act, establishing standing for monetary damages against an online business without a completed transaction requires showing a bona fide intent to use the business's services. The court held that evaluating whether each visitor had such bona fide intent, as well as whether specific visitors encountered particular inaccessible store-linked features across thousands of web pages, presented individualized inquiries that predominate over common legal or factual questions.

Expert Testimony Rulings

The court also resolved three motions regarding expert testimony:

• Survey Evidence: The court denied Ralph Lauren's motion to exclude the survey and opinions of the plaintiff's survey expert. The expert estimated that 3,243 legally blind Californians were impeded by website barriers, which supported the threshold requirement of numerosity. Arguments concerning sample blending and response rates went to evidentiary weight rather than admissibility at the class certification stage.
• Technical Coding and WCAG Opinions: The court granted in part and denied in part Ralph Lauren's motion regarding the plaintiff's computer science expert. The court struck the expert's assertions offering legal conclusions that the website violated the ADA. However, it permitted his technical findings regarding code structure and non-compliance with WCAG 2.1 AA.
• Defense Rebuttal Report: The court granted in part the plaintiff's motion to exclude portions of the declaration of Ralph Lauren's accessibility expert. The court struck newly disclosed opinions that were served past the class certification rebuttal deadline without substantial justification or a showing of harmlessness.

Next Steps

The court appointed the plaintiff as class representative and Wilshire Law Firm, PLC as class counsel. The parties were ordered to meet and confer and file a joint case management statement by July 28, 2026. A case management conference is scheduled for August 4, 2026, at 2:00 PM via Zoom.